# Some things that really annoy me.



## buckythefly (Mar 16, 2009)

I've got few complaints about my 40k hobby, But some things(read as people) really bother me, and since the community is there, I thought I might share my pet peeves, and maybe collect a few from the rest of you. 

Please do keep the swearing to at least every other word, any more then that and its hard to read.


1. That guy who sits on the rumor circuit talking about how amazing the new codex is going to be when it comes out. invuln saves for everything, this new guy with 10 attacks in melee. Blah Blah Blah it never ends, they buy the new codex hoping for all those untold goodies, and they then bitch about the codex for the next 3 months, because surprise, half the stuff they were counting on has totally disappeared.

2. That guy who plays hardcore tourney lists in friendly games, and then as he drives your friendly list into the ground with maximum cheapness, he talks to you constantly about the list you SHOULD have deployed, straight out of every forums suggestions. 

3. That guy who hangs out at the game shop but seldom plays, and confuses every new player that walks in with a solid stream of impressive sounding but completely incorrect rules. "No walkers can't run, no you can't fire that because your a skimmer, Bikes can't cross dangerous terrain or they instantly die if they stop in it., I get kill points for your misshaped unit" So on and so forth, causing so much damage to the new players knowledge of the game, it takes hours and hours to sort the poor bastard out again.


Please share any similar 40k related pet peeves here, I hope I'm not the only one that takes offense to these kind of behaviors, I'm a really strong believer in know thy army, know thy rulebook, take your turn quickly, and play it fair. Why else would you bother paying hundreds of dollars for a game if your just going to muck it up by not knowing how to play it.:alcoholic:


----------



## Vet Sgt Ezekiel (May 8, 2009)

1:The smell of BO in GW stores generally.
There's just no excuse as far as i'm concerned.

2: Twats. You get them in every club/social hobby but GW stuff and RC car racing seems to be where the biggest ones congregate. Why can't people just play/paint etc. without bitching/patronising/contradicting/immature nonsense. In any other social circumstance these people are always less arrogant (i.e silent/apprehensive/the opposite!). Its sad as i know as many people who have quit or not started up over these things as i do people actually involved.


----------



## BroodingLord (Feb 17, 2009)

-Power lists, in competitive tournies i understand, but people (some of them my friends) powergame at local games using extremely competitive lists in friendly games, seems like overkill and is not required.


----------



## Cyklown (Feb 8, 2010)

Not to go off topic, and I enjoy a friendly game as long as we agree it is such ahead of time as much as the next guy, but quite frankly any restriction against being effective is a restriction that you made up.

It's a shame that the game designers are terrible at ballancing things and haven't replaced the codexes that predate the rules. It's a shame that that makes certain things less effective, and sometimes it feels good to use those units knowing they'll suck, but ultimately expecting someone to play worse than they have to because you want them to is something you'll need to agree to in advance or else you shouldn't expect it. If you say "friendly game" and they drop an army that's designed well then sure, complain about that, but if you don't do that then you're making up a set of rules that GW most assuredly did not put in the rulebook.


----------



## Inquisitor Varrius (Jul 3, 2008)

The whiny little kid who calls for a rule check on _every single_ move. Then there's the guy who quits as soon as he starts losing. I play a fluffy, non-competitive ork list (5 units of grots, no vehicles for anyone, and a bunch of kommandos) and my winning odds are 7/120ish. Let me win when I do well! :ireful2:

@Cyklown: I'm not asking people to play crappy on purpose. I just think if you agree to a friendly, 1000pt game ahead of time, dropping a pair of Lash DP's is a bit much.


----------



## Cyklown (Feb 8, 2010)

Well, sure. As long as you specifically agreed that you weren't going to go competitive then other person was in fact doing something wrong. But... expecting someone to play chaos any other way without agreeing that you're both going to hose your armies down a bit would be rediculous. It'd be like expecting someone to not use grabs in street fighter or something.

Ragequiting is certainly annoying. I run into a lot of that playing Smash as well as games like this. Nerdrage is... a sad reality.


----------



## Inquisitor Varrius (Jul 3, 2008)

I was so close to getting my 8th win with my WAAAGH! and then he quits... nothing quite so depressing as that.

And I don't think it's too much to ask that a CSM player not have 2 lash DP's. I play with a lord and DP (without lash) and do alright. It wouldn't win tourney, but it works for friendly stuff. A better example might be with another army, but the idea is there.


----------



## Cyklown (Feb 8, 2010)

Well, if you ask up front then feel free to do so, but aside from you talking them into it for the sake of a game then there's absolutely no reason for them not to do so. GW made an army list. They made some very good things, and some rather crappy things. I mean, that's like complaining about rushes in Starcraft, decks that curve out properly or which don't have bad cards in magic, people trying to screw their opponents in Illuminati or people lying in Diplomacy.

It's a game. There are rules. Any extra rules you make up to the game are fine if they make the game more fun for you, but you should accept that those are you personal/house rules and not at all a part of the official game.

Do I think that agreeing to both field suboptimal armies is fun? Sure. Do I think that there are much more moronic house rules? (like the anything that misses the table is a 1 rules) Sure. It's all opponents consent, however, right up there with IA and proxying for models you don't own.


----------



## neilbatte (Jan 2, 2008)

I don't mind playing power lists and even though I tend to run armies that are more or less balanced or considered weak I still win often enough to keep me interested.
What really annoys me is when facing some of the more obscure army compositions that use rules that change large parts of the game (admitedly mainly in fantasy) and the only time you find out that these characters have some amazing game winning skill that breaks the normal rules is as it shafts your entire game. I tend to let my opponent know beforehand that my army has special rules and ask if they would like to look at the rules before the game. This way I'm not telling them my tactics but still giving them advanced warning that some of my stuff has strange rules.
The only other thing that annoys me is GW chopping and changing rules sets, I know its for a reason (to improve the game) and not just to screw more money from their customer base (Thats what the unending model and price rises are for)
Now I didnt mind when GW simplified from rogue trader era to herohammer as it actually made the game easier and the rules were different enough that it was easier to forget the old system and relearn the new. The next major rules shift was also not a real problem as yet again the rules were different enough that you could easily forget 1 set and just relearn but all the changes after that are more little tweaks that make it easier to mix up 1 set for another and lead to a lot of confusion and If I'm shelling out the best part of £50. I would really expect a bit of effort put in rather than a few changes to the basic rules whose only real purpose is to sell more overpriced tanks and more spacemarines.


----------



## buckythefly (Mar 16, 2009)

@Cyklown I don't so much mind fighting a competitive game thats fine, But someone running a list purposefully to be a giant dick. like 3 squads of 1 deffcopta with buzzsaws just to pop all the enemies vehicles on turn one or using self-covering advancing. I just won't pull out all the cheap tricks if I went to the game shop just looking for a match. 

Because I'm not having fun, if I succeed he's not having fun. Why play the game.


----------



## Cyklown (Feb 8, 2010)

Hey, some of us find those games immensly fun. Playing as hard as you can and winning based on your luck and skill is tremendous fun.


----------



## buckythefly (Mar 16, 2009)

Eh, I find it to be an intense minority that wants to spend hours of their weekend trying to out cheap each other. 
Cause it really isn't skill to build a cheesy army list and most of the time luck won't help you against 100% cheese. But if someone wants to play that way I can oblige them, I just don't assume thats how they want to play.


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

People who refuse to take advice offered in the most friendly and open manner possible, especially when they ask for it! e.g. Someone asks me "Hey is this rule right?" and when I say "No, it's actually..." then they get all angry with me because it isn't exactly what they want to hear.

People conceding, I don't really mind all that much, if it lets me get another game in or play a different list or something. What I hate more is people who sulk more and more as you systematically demolish sections of their army. With every model you kill they'll screw up their face more and get more snappy in their responses and throw the dice harder. I've seen men in their thirties do it. Not funny.


----------



## Cyklown (Feb 8, 2010)

Well, building a powerfull well-rounded take-all comers lists does indeed take skill. Beating a weaker list takes less skill, but if everyone brings good lists then yes, playskill matters tremendously.

I hear what you're saying about assuming people won't want to play that way, but please just be aware that that means you're assuming that someone wants to play by your personal house rules. They're fairly popular rules, but they're rules that are completely made up that have absolutely no bearing on or support from the rulebook.

edit: because I missed what Sethis said!



Sethis said:


> People who refuse to take advice offered in the most friendly and open manner possible, especially when they ask for it! e.g. Someone asks me "Hey is this rule right?" and when I say "No, it's actually..." then they get all angry with me because it isn't exactly what they want to hear.
> 
> People conceding, I don't really mind all that much, if it lets me get another game in or play a different list or something. What I hate more is people who sulk more and more as you systematically demolish sections of their army. With every model you kill they'll screw up their face more and get more snappy in their responses and throw the dice harder. I've seen men in their thirties do it. Not funny.


The getting butthurt when they're wrong is annoying (I actually encounter that at work, not when playing the game, but it's still irks me terribly) but the conceding is spot-on in this and a number of other games. I mean, in a competition I like to encourage this, since then they may get pessimistic and quit, but the rest of the time it's both good practice and a reward for getting to that point.


----------



## primeministersinsiter (May 31, 2009)

-I don't like whiners.
-I don't like when players call people who win consistently powergamers.
-I don't like people who are proud to be powergamers.
-I don't like mushrooms that haven't been washed.


----------



## MyI)arkness (Jun 8, 2008)

primeministersinsiter said:


> -I don't like mushrooms that haven't been washed.


God i hate that too. 

I probably just hate one thing...people who dont know how to have fun. And its not just tabletop, its in cs and starcraft and all those competetive games. I just want to play a game, maybe even stretch my abilities to the limit once in awhile, just for the sake of the process, and then i meet people who either think they are some super humans because they had won, or people who feel suicidal after losing a game and say stuff like "why did i bother coming", well why did you bother doing smth that isnt fun for you?! meh;D


----------



## Devinstater (Dec 9, 2008)

*-Not being able to buy units that exist in the army codex. *

Should I honestly be expected to build my own damn model or have to convert significant portions of it just to use what my codex says I can take.


----------



## MyI)arkness (Jun 8, 2008)

Devinstater said:


> *-Not being able to buy units that exist in the army codex. *
> 
> Should I honestly be expected to build my own damn model or have to convert significant portions of it just to use what my codex says I can take.


Converting is fun =]


----------



## darklove (May 7, 2008)

I am considered a 'power-gamer' because I like to make interesting lists, rather than just fielding 60 Necron Warriors and a Lord+Orb. I think people that are moaning about friendly games being to competitive are just bad at the game. It is a game, and there have to be winners and losers. If you don't play to win then don't bitch about losing. I have some fluff based lists that I fully expect to lose almost every game they play (my Wraithguard army for example because they only have such a short range), so I don't complain.
Power-gaming does not exist - it is a myth. There are just people that are good at the game, and those that think they are better than they really are who get pissed-off when they lose.


----------



## Holmstrom (Dec 3, 2008)

People who get angry over the dice.

One game, Space Marines vs. Tau, which actually was to teach my friend how to play by playing a game with him...the lowest rank on the competitiveness level...he became upset over firing at this Chaplain around fifty times without killing him. He wounded him, but the dice just wanted him alive. Then he drops a battlesuit behind a dreadnought to fire at it. It just gets a weapon destroyed result, and the following turn I unload a squad of Marines from a Rhino and kill it in one go.

He was upset that my Chaplain kept going while his battlesuit just happened to get torn to shreds and kept suggesting I was cheating...during a practice/teaching game...I don't think I'll play that person again if they're going to get angry over a practice game.


----------



## Vet Sgt Ezekiel (May 8, 2009)

Holmstrom said:


> ...I don't think I'll play that person again if they're going to get angry over a practice game.


I don't blame you. Kinda defeats the purpose of the game or indeed having a hobby in the first place. 

On that note, i also hate ''Stressed Erics''.


----------



## Inquisitor Varrius (Jul 3, 2008)

On the other hand, the dice can be annoying. Not to the degree he reacted, but bad rolling can be... aggravating, at least in tourneys. 

My personal new peeve is the people who have no personal space during games. I'm an art student, so I don't either, but if you don't know someone's name, you shouldn't be invading their bubble.


@Darklove, I don't think that "interesting" lists are the problem, it's the uber-cheese armies. 
On the other hand, maybe it's a regional thing. Where I live, there are about 30 people who play to have fun, and won't play nearly as rough as they do in tourneys. In fact, they're very approachable and always treat the new players ok. 
I know 2 people who play to win at all costs, regardless of the enemy's skill, regardless of the location. If you're kicking an Eldar new-comer's ass with a CSM double lash list, does that actually count as a win? I don't think you can argue there isn't a difference there. Call it power gaming, call it something else, but it does exist.


----------



## darklove (May 7, 2008)

Inquisitor Varrius said:


> If you're kicking an Eldar new-comer's ass with a CSM double lash list, does that actually count as a win? I don't think you can argue there isn't a difference there. Call it power gaming, call it something else, but it does exist.


I would strongly dispute that. What you describe is not power-gaming, it is a mis-match of abilities. Putting a noob up against a regular player is the same as putting a regular player up against a really good player - there is an imbalance of skill and knowledge but that does not mean it is power-gaming. The skill is not just in playing, but knowing how to make a list. 
I have not seen anything that could be described as 'power-gaming', in the sense that it is a form of play that goes beyond what can reasonably be expected in a game where everyone is playing by the same rules, in the real world or in the hypothetical examples in this thread.


----------



## Inquisitor Varrius (Jul 3, 2008)

"Reasonably expected" is a pretty fluid term though. Continuing the example with the CSM vs. Eldar:

If the CSM veteran knows the other guy is a noob, and also knows he has a total of 2 games under his belt, and precedes to drop a cheese-list on him, that's a little much. I guess it comes down to expectations, but I would find that CSM player to be a tool. He's deliberately and knowingly crushing a beginner, and probably lowering the odds that player will come back to the hobby.

And I realize this is, as you said, an imbalance of skill (though I'm not sure how the list-building comes in there...) I'm not saying you're legally obliged to tone down your skills against a new-comer, but I do find it to be morally advisable.


----------



## Evil beaver2 (Feb 3, 2009)

I hate ultramarines in general. Why did GW have to choose them to represent 40k? All the blueness just makes me angry.


----------



## Inquisitor Varrius (Jul 3, 2008)

Ah, smurfs. Yeah, it bugs me when people use those. A different colour can go a long way towards making them less annoying.

My new one is Heavy Metal Blaring during a match. Use your iPod, but don't leak sound.


----------



## Snake40000 (Jan 11, 2010)

I *really* hate the people who claim you are cheating, when they them selves don't know the rules. Then you ask you to show them where that rule is and when you do they get angry. 

People who play to competitively against noobs. When i first started, with Tyranids at that, i got my face raped by this one guy when i got my first 1000 points up. Then he spent the rest of the time at the GW bragging and rubbing it in; while i tried to laugh it off. Almost made me quit playing. (I was 14)


----------



## Shovan (Sep 24, 2009)

I'll admit I've let the codex rumor hype get the best of me only get a mess of a codex in the long run (Looking at you Nid codex. Even though the more I read the codex the more I find that I like)

And at times I'll sulk when I get totally owned but I usually try not to sulk that bad, mostly I'm the one putting myself into the bad situation.

I guess personally I don't have many peeves about the game. Though I suppose I really haven't played outside my circle of friends all too often.


----------



## buckythefly (Mar 16, 2009)

@ DarkLove, I don't really find making a cheese list that skillful, read your codex, go online find the cheese, copy the cheese. No skill.

@Shovan Your not that guy, their are people that are way worse then you, I am referring to he whos name might start with "C" and end in "ohdey"


----------



## Citizensmith (Feb 27, 2010)

Evil beaver2 said:


> I hate ultramarines in general. Why did GW have to choose them to represent 40k? All the blueness just makes me angry.


And I'm just painting an new army of them.

I used to play Dark Angels, and just got my kids interested in the game. My youngest wants orks, my eldest wants Marines, and I of course suggested Dark Angels. Partially because that means he'd be able to use mine to and field a decent size army from day 1. Oh no, he latches on to Ultramarines and wouldn't be persuaded. 

I blame the fact that GQ seem to use them in every damn SM picture out there, and the fact that my son is red green color blind so blues are the colors he sees best.


----------



## hungryp (Mar 2, 2010)

Citizensmith said:


> I blame the fact that GQ seem to use them in every damn SM picture out there, and the fact that my son is red green color blind so blues are the colors he sees best.


How dare he! :wink:

I'd say one of my biggest peeves is no-listers. Especially when they're not even playing WYSIWYG. I've actually seen this combo in a tourney. And that's another peeve, stores that insist on running events even though they have no idea how to do it properly.


----------



## Colonel Wolf (Nov 11, 2009)

Players that don't or won't learn the rules and bitch when you pull them up on it.


----------



## Blue Liger (Apr 25, 2008)

My pet peeve atm is the simple editing and spell checking and page referencing in codexs - microsoft word has "tools" to help them with this issue and can be setup so when a page moves references move to the correct page and stick with it! The Tools at GW need to learn to use thier tools properly!!!


----------



## Skull Harvester (Mar 7, 2010)

1.The 10 year old with mommy and daddy's money, who has a 6k army list. . .and thinks they know everything about it, and screams at you if you say otherwise.

There is such a person here, locally.

2. People who say everything sucks because it isn't 1st/2nd/3rd edition anymore.


----------



## Kale Hellas (Aug 26, 2009)

people who complain about your ipod being to loud when they are sitting/standing right next to you as you play or paint, maybe its to loud because your standing withing three inches of me.

people who bag people for being tactically smart, its not my fault i out flanked two units of gaunts with my dreadnought or my fault that my orbital bombardment killed your carnifex before he killed anything.


----------



## darklove (May 7, 2008)

Actually, there are two things that bug me almost as much as the bitching from crap players that lose: people that have not bothered to read their amry's codex and that have not written their list down... It is very annoying to have to correct people all the time about their own rules, or even about how to measure the movement of a model.


----------



## zeroblackstar (Feb 16, 2010)

The following grinds my gears...

- People who quit on turn 2 because they lost their favorite unit/IC
- People who deliberetely move ever so slightly too far every movement phase, so that by turn 5 theyve moved an extra 6" or something
- Those who do not know the rules and base their understanding of them on things like "well my mate Dave said that..."
- *CHEESE LISTS*

I regularly play lists that would get totally steamrolled in a tournie when I play friendly games. I could quite easily play a cheese list and probably defeat a "power gamer" but theres so little skill involved its just painful to play tbh

Take the same chees'd-out-to-the-max army and play almost identical tactics every game with a few mild deviations. BORING.

True skill lies in taking an army thats outgunned and outmatched, and still winning by some inventive playing or unconventional tactics. plus this way is a hell of a lot more fun and creates more WTF moments, which I love.

*disclaimer* the above is my opinion, if you love "power gaming" and destroying newcomers and its all about the win to you, thats marvelous, well done.


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

Inquisitor Varrius said:


> My new one is Heavy Metal Blaring during a match. Use your iPod, but don't leak sound.


Wait, people who you are playing against actually listen to an iPod during the game?

I'd find that incredibly rude, insulting and anti-social. I'd either make repeated sarcastic jibes about it until they put it away or just pack up right then and there. A game is supposed to be a social activity between two people who otherwise would never have spoken to each other (in a pick-up game) or between friends (everything else). Listening to an iPod while playing is along the same lines as playing on a gameboy during a wedding ceremony.

Yes I have seen someone do that.


----------



## bakoren (Nov 16, 2009)

This one guy I played against, he was a SM player. He had some SM IC that gave his unit Infiltrate. The player, thought this character was creed, which meant EVERYONE got Infiltrate. And after we pointed out "that isn't how that works." he put them back in the proper starting positions on like turn 2. This irked me because I would have targeted them if they were where they were supposed to be.


----------



## OddJob (Nov 1, 2007)

darklove said:


> I would strongly dispute that. What you describe is not power-gaming, it is a mis-match of abilities.


QFT

What gets my goat:
1. Some chump waxing lyrical about how great they/their list/their dice are and then I beat them without having to get out of autopilot. What a complete waste of time for me. 
2. The same chumps telling me how overpowered everything not in their codex is. I was seriously told my Nid codex was overpowered because I could take nine carnifexes...
3. Somebody who complains about dice after about five minutes of play- I'll rant as hard as the next man over a seriously improbable event (famous for it in bloodbowl) but don't tell me your dice always suck after your first run roll.

To sum up, people who are crap at the game and don't realise it annoy me :grin:


----------



## Warlock in Training (Jun 10, 2008)

I dont like that guy who tries to butt into your game with their little to no knowledge. I really hate the loud mouth guy who screams "Why cant I kill your Flamers?" when everyone is standing next to him. I really hate the assholes who pick up your fragile metal models without asking to get a better look, then drop them. :angry:


----------



## Phil73805 (Feb 28, 2010)

Sethis said:


> I'd either make repeated sarcastic jibes about it until they put it away or just pack up right then and there.


No Sethis, you can have some real fun with this type of player. Everytime you speak to them you mouth the words without making a sound. The first time they'll take out their headphones to hear you but after a couple of times like this they'll turn down the volume a bit, you keep doing it, they turn it down some more until they realise what you've been doing...

Seriously, hours of fun to be had there :biggrin:


----------



## Phil73805 (Feb 28, 2010)

But seriously folks, let's be honest here for a moment. Having your bum handed to you by the guy who has turned up with 9 Carnifexes, 2 Hive Tyrants and a pointed stick is no fun at all. I don't like to lose, I don't know anyone that does. However, what really bothers me is not having the chance to put up a fight.

Probably *the* best game I've ever had was against one of the guys at Tanelorn Wargaming Club. It was a 3000 point battle, my Blood Angels vs. his dug-in Plague Marines playing from short table edge to short table edge. What a game! It came down to the last dice roll of the last turn to decide the winner. I lost...and cared not a jot. It was a fight to the death, the sort of battle that people sing songs about.

I think everyone here can get on board with the difference between the spirit of a codex and letter of the codex. Yes, with a little deviousness you can write a list that will have most other gamers sobbing into their beer (or beverage of choice)...and then be baffled that your opponent didn't have a good time. Ooh, there's a shock.

Some people believe that 40K is a 'whoever gets first turn wins' kind of game and there is a little truth to that. However, putting down plenty of terrain to ensure that there are no long and uninterrupted lines of fire usually puts paid to that particular problem. When the codexes are written I believe that they're written by guys who play the game for fun and not as if it is a life or death matter. 

I'm not a competitive player and by that I mean that I play to win, but not at any cost. I will pick a list that I feel gives me a good all round capability but I will *never* min/max a list so that I pound my opponent into the ground before turn two. It isn't fun for me and it certainly is no fun for my opponent. Like Sethis said above, it's a social experience and I want both sides to enjoy it. I try to set up a game where both sides really get to fight it out. 

That's my idea of a fun game.


----------



## Azkaellon (Jun 23, 2009)

Suck it Up Princess, Like the game or Leave it. If you leave it.......Send me your ork's i need some models to melt onto my avatars base.


----------



## Holmstrom (Dec 3, 2008)

Witch King of Angmar said:


> Suck it Up Princess, Like the game or Leave it. If you leave it.......Send me your ork's i need some models to melt onto my avatars base.


Things that annoy me? ^


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

Phil73805 said:


> No Sethis, you can have some real fun with this type of player. Everytime you speak to them you mouth the words without making a sound. The first time they'll take out their headphones to hear you but after a couple of times like this they'll turn down the volume a bit, you keep doing it, they turn it down some more until they realise what you've been doing...


I've never had anyone do it to me. I'm utterly amazed that anyone would. I didn't think anyone who might play wargames would actually be THAT offensive.

And as for the rest of your post, I think that most of us are somewhere in the middle ground. I enjoy competitive games and casual games alike, and will often run the same list in both. The difference will be how I play, for example against an IG player I just turbo-ed my Falcon filled with Fire Dragons straight forward in a "Screw them all!" attitude where normally I at least try to use terrain or minimise incoming fire lanes. Turns out that even 6 Leman Russes (including a Vanquisher) couldn't actually scratch the paint (!! :laugh: ), but that's not really my point. I think that even if someone is playing a tourney list, it is possible to tone your game to fit your audience.

At an extreme level, for example, it would mean I sent my Fire Dragons off to kill a combat squad of marines instead of the guys Predator because it's his first game ever and it's his only tank. Wrecking it on Turn 2 is a bit unfair and not-fun. I'm virtually certain to win the game, no problem, but I can do it in such a way that he isn't tabled by turn 4, which is what I can regularly do to other more experienced players.

However there are some lists that you can't actually do this with. Nob bikers spring to mind, because there is only one tactic, and the only alternative is to sit around sucking your thumb. There is no real way to minimise the effectiveness of it without it being glaringly obvious even to an new player that you're not trying to win, and that is condescending and damaging to their pride (possibly more than crushing them totally).


----------



## darklove (May 7, 2008)

Sethis said:


> At an extreme level, for example, it would mean I sent my Fire Dragons off to kill a combat squad of marines instead of the guys Predator because it's his first game ever and it's his only tank. Wrecking it on Turn 2 is a bit unfair and not-fun. I'm virtually certain to win the game, no problem, but I can do it in such a way that he isn't tabled by turn 4, which is what I can regularly do to other more experienced players.


I talked to someone about this once, because I was concerned that people were getting fed up of losing to me all the time.
Ultimately it came down to an ethical question: is it right to play badly to make someone else feel better? She was dead against it because it would seem patronising and arrogant and, in the long run, not help my opponents become better players. When I play a game I don't want people to go easy on me, I want every game to be a tactical and strategic challenge (40k or otherwise). It is the only fair way to play, and the only way to elevate new players in terms of skills and knowledge.


----------



## MyI)arkness (Jun 8, 2008)

She? Last time girl wanted me to handle wrestle i got to know that she and her freundin hate when boys give up on purpose, maybe its same for 40k..? And 7500 necron omg;d


----------



## primeministersinsiter (May 31, 2009)

Don't worry about Witch King, he's gunning to be Stella-2.


----------



## Blue Liger (Apr 25, 2008)

As darklove said I hate those who don't know their codex well and have been playing for over 6 months to a year - my younger brother had this problem when I played him so each time I said what's your BS or WS or S etc I made him look it up so he got into the habit of learning his book (this was with his SM) he now plays Orks and I ask him what something is without opening the book he can tell me and then I have to look myself when I can't believe he actually gets it on the mark as I ao used to telling him read your rulebook!


----------



## Phil73805 (Feb 28, 2010)

I'm certainly not talking about dropping a game deliberately! You're right Sethis and darklove, it *is* patronising and ultimately not in the best interests of your opponent, however, neither is pounding them into the dirt with a min/max'd tourney list. I've been that noob, it wasn't fun and I learnt nothing at all from the experience. 

Let me put it another way, I want a close fought game and will do what I can within the rules and spirit of the game as I understand it to make that happen. I won't deliberately unload my drop pod in front of a heavy bolter armed devastator squad to make my opponent feel warm and fuzzy. On the other hand, for a new or inexperienced player I will give them some tips when setting up (and sometimes during the game) that make my life harder in game so that we both enjoy a challenging battle.

There is an element of luck in 40K. A bad player with some luck can pull off a victory in a way that isn't really possible with WFB. There's an old(ish) military adage, I'd rather be lucky than good. I've seen the very best in the business lose badly with a stroke of rotten luck. Darklove this means that if you're winning all the time you're both good and lucky, nice combo 

I don't like tourney play at all. I think it adds a level of 'codex accountancy' and unnecessary seriousness to a game where luck is a powerful factor. Chess as a game is all skill but once you put dice into the mix there's going to be a random element that can't be planned for. This will drive some people to play mathhammer 40K in order to remove the randomness as much as possible. This will inevitably lead to armies that are nowhere near the spirit of the codex and the game and a competitive win-at-all-costs edge to the proceedings that saps the fun out of the experience for me.

For those who love that edginess, great, for those that don't it makes playing against a hardcore competitive player a bit of a chore.


----------



## Cato Sicarius (Feb 21, 2008)

I hate people who are against the Ultramarines for unreasonable reasons.

<rant>

"I don't like all that blue!" Well, what about Blood Angels and "all that red", or Black Templars and "all that black"? Dark Angels and green, Space Wolves and blue-grey? Believe it or not people, most armies are painted one colour in particular with other colours around it (in this case, white and probably gold but maybe something else).

"They're too common" Y'know ironically because everybody think this nobody plays them, making them uncommon. There are two players, including me, who go to my local GW, and the other player I haven't really seen very much since he lost to Orks without killing a single Ork (impressive feat really, considering the Land Raider Redeemer).

The old "poster boys" statement. Ahem, Black Legion? Cadians? Heck, in the 4th Ed. Rulebook they used a picture of Pedro Kantor (not referring to him by name of course).

"Blandness". I hate this one the most, I detest this statement. "Ultramarines are bland!" No they are NOT. They are unique. They don't differ from the Codex, and they're just about the only Chapter who follows it to the letter (Imperial Fists sometimes are too stubborn). They have plenty of background material, since the new Codex came out, just about the most any Chapter has (I'll get to that again in a bit). "Yeah, well my Chapter's DIY and has 4 pages of fluff on Word." Well, whoop-dee-doo, my Chapter has practically the entire Space Marine Codex devoted to it.

And this brings me to the next one, "They took over the Codex." Stop. Think for a moment. Why did they devote the Codex to the Ultramarines? Because the Ultramarines are the only ones who follow it that well. Is there anything wrong with that? No. There isn't, really, so stop complaining.

</rant>


----------



## shaantitus (Aug 3, 2009)

I am a gaming noob. I have very little gaming experience. I would hope that when it comes to learning how the game is played in the rest of the world that it is still fun. 

Warhammer 40k evolved from rogue trader, a tabletop skirmish game more akin to a rpg than anything else. It was not for heavy competition but FUN.

A point I would like to make. In the 40k world do you think Marneus Calgar sits down before a battle and says 'Hmm I am fighting traitor guard so I can ditch all my ap2 and 3 weapons(plasma cannons etc) and load up on lascannons and heavy bolters.'? or would he say 'Go forth and slaughter the heretics in the name of the emperor.' and deploy the companies at his disposal. The marine with the plasma cannon wouldn't be told 'Brother, your weapon is not points effective against the guard so you must remain on the battlebarge.' He'd be told 'Get out there and give those bastards a burning plasma injection!' 

This taylored lists thing is a little silly and the whole intense competition thing seems a little incongruous with the origins of the game. The spirit in which apoc was written seems more appropriate. The fact that intense competition can be encouraged when some armies are so out of date makes little or no sense.


----------



## VanitusMalus (Jun 27, 2009)

I'll play any list. There was a time where I hated people who brought to bear the same uber list for every game, but then I started adapting my list and everytime I found something that worked. Back in third editon when you had to get your opponents permission before bringing special characters I use to tell them "Bring 'em", because I knew he was putting a lot of points in something I knew I was going to kill. Just adapt your tactics if your enemy keep bringing that competitve list, play hima couple of time see how that list works and then adjust and wear his ass out. I'll play any list, bring it on.

But back to topic, things I hate:

I hate the person who isn't playing but watching who continually butts in with his opinion about our playing style, rules, army composition, what I should have done, what my opponent should have done. Honestly guy if we wanted your opinion we'd beat it out of you.

The irritating girlfriend who's continuously talking to my opponent about bullshit that can wait, thus delaying the pace of game. The funnier version of this is when they are having an argument that should totally be private (also causing him to make several mistakes, guaranteeing me the upperhand).

The player who moves units and then ALWAYS AND I MEAN ALWAYS wants to move them back and start again. Look mate once or twice is fine, but I don't have an hour of my life to waste because you want to remove eight units every turn.

Speaking of the "not knowing your codex", they guy who thinks he knows my codex better than me, yet does not play the army I'm using. How hell are you going to tell me about IG when you've never played them before and I've been playing them since second edition? 

The person who plays WFB and not 40K AT ALL, but is always interjecting WFB rules during my 40k battles.

The WFB player who keeps trying to pull WFB rules during a 40K battle.

The paint commentator. Look I'm glad you can paint the Mona Lisa on the knee pad of a Space Marine, but I can't, I do the best job I can and I like the way I paint so feck off!


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

darklove said:


> I talked to someone about this once, because I was concerned that people were getting fed up of losing to me all the time.
> Ultimately it came down to an ethical question: is it right to play badly to make someone else feel better? She was dead against it because it would seem patronising and arrogant


This is why I mentioned a couple of examples of playing "Marginally worse" but not "like a retard". The first is an acceptable way of making the game fun for both players, the second is not.



darklove said:


> and, in the long run, not help my opponents become better players. When I play a game I don't want people to go easy on me, I want every game to be a tactical and strategic challenge (40k or otherwise). It is the only fair way to play, and the only way to elevate new players in terms of skills and knowledge.


Would you like to learn to play Starcraft against a high-ranked Korean player?

Would you like to learn to play Magic: The Gathering with the winner of the last Pro Tour?

Would you like to learn to play chess against Deep Blue?

I think the answer to the above questions is a pretty hefty "No" *unless* they were willing to tone their game down in order for you to grasp the fundamentals. You don't learn anything about Starcraft when you get zerg rushed every single game before you've built your 3rd SCV or Pylon. You don't learn anything about Fencing if someone just scores 5 points off you and goes to fence against someone else.

As their skill increases, you can raise yours as well. Eventually (hopefully) you will both be equally matched and have nail-bitingly close games with only a little bit of luck/skill dividing the outcomes. But don't expect it at Game One.

Something I just thought of is that you can make the game more interesting to you by deliberately using a non-competitive list, and gradually using a more competitive list as you go along. As a personal example:

Most Competitive: Eldar
Strong but not OP: Scouts, Orks
Mediocre at best: Pre-Heresy Emperors Children (Chaos Dex)

I started collecting Orks because people were sick of playing my Eldar. I did my Scout army because I liked the theme, and they can also win games (and also lose horribly). I'm about to begin my Emperors Children because I feel I can finally paint a "Showcase" army that actually looks good, provided I can spend enough time on each model and not just rush off. The fact that the ECs are going to be a totally underwhelming list compared to my Eldar doesn't bother me, because I know that if I *do* want to win, I can just break out the Grav tanks and go stomp some face. However I am long past the point where my ego demands that I win every game. Of course I still* try* to do my best, but it's not going to wreck my day if I lose 3 out of 3 games.


----------



## buckythefly (Mar 16, 2009)

@ ZeroBlackStar and Phil and the others, I'm glad someone knows what I'm talking about. I wouldn't throw a game for the life of me, but I am totally cool throwing some friendly tips or basic strategy, Although far be it for me to tell you how to build your army, I only play Orks.

@Witch King You can have them, If you can kill them, Princess. I eat avatar on toast with my breakfast. Isolate and Stomp, then dance a jig on the fancy burny corpse.


----------



## MyI)arkness (Jun 8, 2008)

Cato Sicarius said:


> I hate people who are against the Ultramarines for unreasonable reasons.
> 
> <rant>
> 
> "I don't like all that blue!" Well, what about Blood Angels and "all that red", or Black Templars and "all that black"? Dark Angels and green, Space Wolves and blue-grey? Believe it or not people, most armies are painted one colour in particular with other colours around it (in this case, white and probably gold but maybe something else).


I hated ultramarines, but later i realised they have their own good parts ;D. They just seemed so boring. But Sicarius saved them for me what an awesome guy.



shaantitus said:


> A point I would like to make. In the 40k world do you think Marneus Calgar sits down before a battle and says 'Hmm I am fighting traitor guard so I can ditch all my ap2 and 3 weapons(plasma cannons etc) and load up on lascannons and heavy bolters.'? or would he say 'Go forth and slaughter the heretics in the name of the emperor.'


Actualy it would make alot of sense to take weapons better designed to fight traitor guard. In 40k books astartes often prepared in a certain way against certain enemy that they knew had a certain weakness :biggrin: they also could choose what ammo to take (in one book two astartes were debating that if they were just fighting heavy armor enemies, and now gona fight "traitor guard", they would be better off switching from AP ammo to fletchette ammo).



Sethis said:


> Would you like to learn to play Starcraft against a high-ranked Korean player?




Too bad 40k doesnt take that much skill as sc , so even if a new player is playing against someone good, he will still get to shoot something or atleast understand what the f is going on, unlike the pulverisation against such astronomicaly better opponents like a korean pro or deep blue.


----------



## clever handle (Dec 14, 2009)

buckythefly said:


> 3. That guy who hangs out at the game shop but seldom plays, and confuses every new player that walks in with a solid stream of impressive sounding but completely incorrect rules....I get kill points for your misshaped units


He does get a kill point for that. Assuming they're lost to the warp. If you bring a unit to battle & it doesn't make it through the game either by being eliminated, running off the board or death via deepstrike mishap hey are counted as a kill poit


----------



## darklove (May 7, 2008)

Sethis said:


> Would you like to learn to play Starcraft against a high-ranked Korean player?
> 
> Would you like to learn to play Magic: The Gathering with the winner of the last Pro Tour?
> 
> Would you like to learn to play chess against Deep Blue?


*YES
YES
YES*

I would not want to play any of those games against a weak player.

How soft are you guys?!? Firstly you seem to be forgetting that it is a game - nobody is going to die if you lose. Secondly, you only ever get better by being challenged. Thirdly, find some balls and actually play a difficult game! You will be better off for it.


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

Darklove, I think you're fibbing in order to make a point. To qualify;

Deep Blue beat Kasparov the last time it played. Kasparov was the World Champion, playing as hard as he could.

Kasparov had been playing Chess since age 7, and had the worlds highest rating from 1986 to 2005. He has literally dedicated his entire life to mastering chess and is considered by most people to be the best player of all time. Deep Blue still kicked his ass.

Bearing all of that in mind, I don't think that it's much of an exaggeration to say that Deep Blue could checkmate you after about 10 moves in *every single game you ever played*. There is no window of opportunity there for learning. I repeat, you would not learn anything. As a consequence, you would never get any better. Because you never got any better, you would keep losing over and over again, even if you played for 20 years.

In addition to that fact, why would you continue to play a game that cost you literally hundreds of pounds and hours of your spare time simply to lose literally every single game, ever? What would your motivation to keep playing be? And before you say "Yeah, but I'd want to get better" then I have a simple counter-argument: You never would get better. Strategically, the best you could do would be to tailor your list to fight my army, which does not require skill at all. In addition, as soon as you did it, then I'd just change my own army/composition and keep beating your face into the ground. Eventually you would realise this, and either stop playing or find another opponent. Very very few people have the perseverence to keep playing a game that they consistently lose for an extended period of time, without ever even coming close to winning.

There is a reason we don't set 5 year olds algebra homework. It's because they wouldn't learn anything from it. Instead we build them up to it over a few years of basic arithmatic. The same philosophy applies to every learning environment on the planet, because it is the best way to learn. Why should extra-curricular activities be any different?



darklove said:


> How soft are you guys?!? Firstly you seem to be forgetting that it is a game - nobody is going to die if you lose. Secondly, you only ever get better by being challenged. Thirdly, find some balls and actually play a difficult game! You will be better off for it.


I just named 5 difficult pastimes that I have engaged in, and have developed a certain degree of skill in. Of course I lost more or less every bout I had when I was first learning to Fence. Of course I lost every Starcraft game I was playing online. But I improved because I had someone teaching me, rather than someone who just stomped me and then walked off boasting about how easily he'd won.


----------



## EmbraCraig (Jan 19, 2009)

darklove said:


> *YES
> YES
> YES*
> 
> ...



To give an other example - I recently started trying out Magic the Gathering Online. I've always fancied taking up Magic, but didn't know anyone locally to play face to face, so I figured that the online version was a decent place to start.

Aaanyway - turns out the new player rooms (where I'd expected to be playing against other new players with the pre-built decks or decks they've built using the starting cards with maybe a few extras) are actually filled with folks who can fill their decks with lots of fancy rares... unless you actually shout out in chat looking for someone who's willing to stick to a lower standard deck, you've got no hope of learning what you should be doing with your own cards.

Is it a mismatch in abilities as was said earlier in the thread? Yeah, sure - of course it is. But I've got no way of knowing that until I start the game, the same as the new guy in your games club has no way of knowing you've turned up with the list you're tuning for the national qualifiers the next weekend.

Playing better players can only make you better once you've got a grasp of the basics - getting stomped on when you've no idea what's going on is no fun for the new player, and no challenge for the person winning...


----------



## hells_fury (Apr 17, 2008)

what i hate, winning with ease is no fun at all 

had a game of 4 players free for all, i was left alone as the other 3 pulverised each other and in the end there was 2 big nid thingies against 30 sisters and an exorcist, lame boring easy win for me, so i chucked all 30 sisters at the nids, never had so much fun watching all my sisters die  but in genral winning without much trouble isnt very much fun to me, i like epic battles where theres 1 or 2 troops left staggering off the field blood dripping from their many wounds, not 2 squads of unscarred sisters marching off laughing with a slight scratch on their amour


----------



## Holmstrom (Dec 3, 2008)

I'd have to agree with *darklove* on the point about playing more experienced players. This is how you learn, so long as you are playing a respectable opponent anyway. A respectable opponent will teach a greenhorn while they play, explain the things that he did, explain moves you should have done, ect. If you're facing a cheese list against some arrogant 'tommy tough nuts', he'll probably take advantage of you and rub a defeat in your face to pump up his minuscule self esteem rather then teach you how to counter it.

A respectable competitive player should crave difficult games. What fun is there in defeating someone who knows nothing about the game or your army?


----------



## The Son of Horus (Dec 30, 2006)

While I'd generally agree that it's just poor sportsmanship to rub a defeat in someone's face, no matter the circumstance, sometimes people can use being brought down a peg or two. Beating up (to use Holstrom's term, which is excellent) "tommy tough nuts" and demonstrating that playing well and using sound tactics on the table can beat a net cheese list can not only sometimes make those ultra-competitive douchers settle down a bit, but inspire people who regularly lose to those people. In those cases, a "How does that pole taste, beeotch?" is still unsportsmanlike, but has a greater purpose for the community as a whole.

As for what actually annoys me? It's actually the aforementioned "Tommy tough nuts" types. The ones who measure their manliness on their success at beating petulent twelve-year olds with plastic spacemen. They're incapable of creative, independent thought, and not only find it silly to do anything other than just look up how to win online, but insist that the only way to win at 40k is to do things -exactly- the way they do. These same people pack up and leave if they're losing on turn 3, or drop from a tournament if they don't win round 1. 

I find net-decking (or net-listing...call it what you will) an army in any capacity to be sort of reprehensible anyway. Congratulations, you copied what someone else is doing, and are winning because you found something broken on the internet. *golf clap.* Power builds make the game suck, and honestly, I don't see how it's even fun to play that crap. The thing that saddens and annoys me the most is that GW seems to have embraced the idea of people doing that, and have been writing codecies recently to encourage, or at the very least, accommodate that behavior.


----------



## screenedwings (Mar 5, 2010)

i agree with your things


----------



## darklove (May 7, 2008)

I would genuinely love to play against Deep Blue, I really really would. I have been playing chess for about 25 years and know that I would still get totally out-classed by a machine that cost more to make than I earn in 10 years. I would still learn a lot. Sethis, I think you are going a bit extreme by comparing 40k to chess, and there is absolutely no equivalent that can be made between matching a beginner chess player against Deep Blue that would find a parallel in 40k. It is actually like comparing noughts-and-crosses with chess, or yachting with 40k.
40k is a very simple game, and it should not take someone more than a month or two to become as good as you can get. This isn't the sort of game where you improve with years and years of studying.

Seriously now, stop finding crutches for bad players and just play the bloody game. There are things that are properly annoying, like people listening to iPods while they play or cheaters: *NOT* just the fact that someone is better than you! How pathetic is that!


----------



## OddJob (Nov 1, 2007)

darklove said:


> 40k is a very simple game, and it should not take someone more than a month or two to become as good as you can get.


If you think this is true you need better opponents. I agree wholeheartedly with the rest of your comment though.


----------



## Warlock in Training (Jun 10, 2008)

The rules are anything but simple. Hell they change every few years. Deff Rolla for example, untill recently there was no solid rule for it. So simple? Hell no. But the basics are not super hard either. If a question pops up, re read the rules. I hate those know it all rule hounds. The punks that shout as loud as possible "NO YOU CANT, THIS IS HOW IT WORKS!!!" Jeeza! If Im wrong just say, "Actually this is how it works, right here on Page watever..."


----------



## hungryp (Mar 2, 2010)

darklove said:


> noughts-and-crosses


Winner: Best Britishism of the Day


----------



## hungryp (Mar 2, 2010)

Warlock in Training said:


> I hate those know it all rule hounds. The punks that shout as loud as possible "NO YOU CANT, THIS IS HOW IT WORKS!!!" Jeeza! If Im wrong just say, "Actually this is how it works, right here on Page watever..."


There's a reason they don't do that...most of them don't know the actual rules because they've never actually bought or read a rulebook or codex.


----------



## Baltar (Aug 16, 2008)

People that complain about losing.

What the hell is a "friendly" game, when it isn't a game based on physical condition.

They have friendly games in sport, and it works because the players don't push themselves, and thus don't require as much recovery time.

The same doesn't apply to 40k. You play, and you either win or lose. You play to win, as that's the objective of the game.

So turning up and having the attitude "You're not supposed to thrash the shit out of me, because it isn't fun anymore" is totally idiotic. It's the entire objective of the game - a wargame designed to simulate two armies killing each other.

Basically, I just see it as a way for people to cover up the fact that they are utter crap at 40k.


----------



## The Thunder of KayVaan (Jun 19, 2009)

My massive pet peeve is that my dog has nits!

Back on topic the thing i hate is that no-one reads the bloody rules and frigging cheater! Out of my gaming group im the guy who knows the rules and actually buys the BRB.

i made an oath and keep it to this day: if i play an army without the opponent having a codex or me having it on hand, i refuse to play with them. this is due to a 12 year oldish (well he acted like one anyway) kid who was the cheater. Me and my friend played against him and his group of three other friends.

Anyway one thing that annoys me about this lot is that i told them to take it one at a time but refused to listen and i had about 2 of them shouting at me to roll dies for saves etc. and the other two shouting at my friend for same things. 2 things that annoyed me about it 1. gave me a bloody headache 2. was very disorganised and had no idea what was shooting at my troops. The cheater (who im now going to refer to as the Alpha) Was a right twat and i bet he thought this "hmm... lets make up strengths for weapons which is alot lower!" anyway he was playing guard and said that a krak 'nade launcher was strength 8 (was playing 4th at time)

He shot it at my friends LRC and blew it up. in the end my and my friend knew we had lost and did a suicide mission with our termys and deeped striked them in the middle of their army. i was suprised they last a turn of everything the opposing team threw at them and they were only 5 men, very pleased with them only if one was left in the end.

Anyway back to the point of the story i found out a week later looking at 4th guard codex that krak 'nade launcher were only strength 6. swore under breath never to play with the alpha again and not to play againsth some one without having the armies' codex on hand. the sad thing was that one of the group i thought was actually trying to play by the rules but the alpha made up all sorts of crap.

*wheew* sorry for old man rant of 'back in my day' sort of thing but yeah. hate people not having codexs and the excuse of "ohh but they cost £15" usally my responce is "yeah but its a new release, won't bring a new one out in a while and has EVERYTHING you need while for me its £18 friggin pounds and they bring a new one out every 6 months!"


----------



## buckythefly (Mar 16, 2009)

The Real Sanguinius said:


> People that complain about losing.
> 
> What the hell is a "friendly" game, when it isn't a game based on physical condition.
> 
> ...



I agree that 40k is a game where two armies are supposed to kill each other. I'd much rather face someone tactically, how our armies would do it, instead of cheese lists with no semblance of combat strategy, beyond manipulating the rules to give them the most advantage. I don't mind having the hell beat out of me if they did it with superior table strategy or luck.


----------



## Inquisitor Varrius (Jul 3, 2008)

The object of the game is not to win. It's to have fun. If winning is what makes you enjoy the game, then it's the same thing for you. The rest of us have fun with WTF moments, beer & pizza, and laughing as our crappy rolls lead to our instant death. The question is one of style. Here's a hypothetical situation:

You are playing a total noob. His set-up is crap, his movements incorrect, and his target selection absolutely wrong. You set up your army for certain victory, and prepare to engage. You roll in your tanks, start shooting.. and miss everything. For the rest of the game, you fail all terrain tests, miss all but 3 enemy in shooting, and get utterly slaughtered. You learn nothing from this game, unless you count your hunch that Tzeentch hates you. Do you enjoy the game?

I've done this. It was actually my most memorable game.  I got totally screwed by turn 5, due to rolls, but thoroughly enjoyed it. There's nothing like the knowledge of your own impending doom to make the game more enjoyable. In my case, this was enough to make the game fun, without winning or learning. It's all a matter of perspective.


----------



## Baltar (Aug 16, 2008)

It's pedantic to point out, but the objective of the game is always to win.

The purpose of the game is to have fun. Objective and purpose are two different things.


----------



## The Thunder of KayVaan (Jun 19, 2009)

Agreed with sanguinius. but i prefer the fun part


----------



## Inquisitor Varrius (Jul 3, 2008)

Ah, some of us prefer purpose to objective. If you win but hate it, your not doing yourself any favours.


----------



## The Thunder of KayVaan (Jun 19, 2009)

Also agree with Varrius.


----------



## EmbraCraig (Jan 19, 2009)

The Real Sanguinius said:


> It's pedantic to point out, but the objective of the game is always to win.
> 
> The purpose of the game is to have fun. Objective and purpose are two different things.


Definition of objective:



> ob·jec·tive
> /əbˈdʒɛktɪv/ Show Spelled[uhb-jek-tiv] Show IPA
> –noun
> 1.
> something that one's efforts or actions are intended to attain or accomplish; purpose; goal; target: the objective of a military attack; the objective of a fund-raising drive.


Your goal might always be to win - fair play, if that's what you're after then that's fine. My objective (purpose, goal, target or any other pseudonym you might want to put it under) is to enjoy myself, have a few laughs, and usually a few beers in the process.

Someone said earlier on in the thread that no one dies if you lose the game - fair play, but I don't get anything extra out of winning either. So either way, as long as I leave the table with a smile on my face I'm happy.


----------



## VanitusMalus (Jun 27, 2009)

I've had enjoyable battles when I've lost and enjoyable battles when I've won, but my goal in the game is to win. Now you can try and accomplish winning in two ways: A. Playing your best, using sound tactics, congratulating your opponent on a fun time after you win or B. Mocking your opponent during battle, bragging about how great you're doing and how you always win, name calling your opponent's units when they fail at their task, yelling out ONE! when you're opponent rolls the die, then after your victory mocking your opponent some more and then bragging for the next couple of weeks how you destroyed your opponent in combat.

Now A is what we're all SUPPOSE to act like when we play 40K and I believe this is the spirit of "fun" many of you are refering to, however we have all played against or know a player like B and these individuals are the ones who ruin the spirit of the game. You do play the game to win, but you don't play the game to humiliate.


----------



## Baltar (Aug 16, 2008)

In terms of person B, well, I dunno how old you all are, but, I recommend not playing against 12 year olds.

I know that this is a vast majority of 40k players (mostly those playing as Ultrasmurfs - the players with no imagination), but those without prepubescent levels of maturity are still quite plentiful, I'm sure.


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

VanitusMalus said:


> yelling out ONE! when you're opponent rolls the die


Is this bad form? When someone says "I shoot my Multimelta at your Dreadnought..." and roll the dice I will sometimes finish the sentence with "and miss..."

I don't do it all the time though,just sometimes on really key dice rolls. Would that piss you off? I also sometimes stare at the dice with a constipated look on my face and think really hard to myself "ONE. ONE. ONE." I swear it works. :laugh:


----------



## zeroblackstar (Feb 16, 2010)

Sethis said:


> Is this bad form? When someone says "I shoot my Multimelta at your Dreadnought..." and roll the dice I will sometimes finish the sentence with "and miss..."
> 
> I don't do it all the time though,just sometimes on really key dice rolls. Would that piss you off? I also sometimes stare at the dice with a constipated look on my face and think really hard to myself "ONE. ONE. ONE." I swear it works. :laugh:


I do a similar thing where I seem to be providing a running commentary on the dice rolls but its not a malicious one. 

More like "7 bolter shots, 3+ to hit, 4 hits, roll to wound on a..." ect

and not so much "...and my melta slags the f*ck out of your warboss, BOOM! Headshot."

I think just stating out loud whats going on is necessary to keeping the game flowing and enjoyable really :good:


----------



## Blue Liger (Apr 25, 2008)

When people stand around your game going "show us your ones" when rolling dice - it really gets annoying, like it's a game of chance you saying something has no impact on the game dice and is just wasting our time and yours! It just bugs me so when someone says it that's not a good mate of mine I stare at them with a pause and then say get out or go away!


----------



## 40k Mom (Jan 26, 2010)

EmbraCraig said:


> Playing better players can only make you better once you've got a grasp of the basics - getting stomped on when you've no idea what's going on is no fun for the new player, and no challenge for the person winning...


Amen!:victory:


----------



## KingOfCheese (Jan 4, 2010)

One thing that really annoys me...

Playing against players that have troops with no transports, overpriced HQ's, upgrades that are nowhere near worth their points, and units that are completely unplayable like possessed, kroot, etc.
If you want to run them in your army, then thats fine. But for god sake dont bitch to me saying "your army is too cheesy", "your codex is overpowered", "your a powergamer", etc.
And then to top it off, try to tell ME to run units and upgrades that are a waste of points to try and make the game more fun!!!!
How about instead of me doing that, if winning is so important to you then get your dick out of your chaos dread and make a list that will actually WIN a game.

I mean fuck, its like being in a drag race with someone who insists on driving a Hyundai, then bitches about losing and tells me that im only allowed to use 1st gear so its more fun.

How about get out of my face till you make an army that can actually win, or else accept that your going to lose most of your games if you insist that the swooping hawks stay in your list.


----------



## Siphon (Jan 17, 2009)

I don't really hate anything about the hobby. I get mildly annoyed with whiners and with cheats, but since I am generally one of the most easy going people ever and play to have fun, I shrug it off. At the very worst, I'll just not play with someone again.

I do have one major and one minor annoyances about the forums and more specifically forum habits. My major: I hate any kind of discriminatory/racist language. Grow up and leave the cave please. Luckily, the mods here are pretty top notch and seem to kill this stuff rather quickly. I've been very impressed with this website.

My minor annoyance is trivial and petty (I'll admit it) but I dislike the win/loss records people post up in their sigs. It seems rather childish. They almost all show as massive winners. Either you are telling the truth and want to show off/brag to gain attention and/or make yourself look good or you are lying for the same reasons which is even sillier. It's easy enough to have pride in your wins without parading some random number around on an internet forum in an attempt to impress people. There's literally no way to say it's not grandstanding since you didn't have to put it up and you obviously want people to see it. I can't help it, it just makes me snort every time I see it.


----------



## Arcane (Feb 17, 2009)

Devinstater said:


> *-Not being able to buy units that exist in the army codex. *
> 
> Should I honestly be expected to build my own damn model or have to convert significant portions of it just to use what my codex says I can take.


If GW isn't going to make models for everything in their codex why do you insist that everything in your army must be GW if you plan to play most any "official" tourny


----------



## MyI)arkness (Jun 8, 2008)

EmbraCraig said:


> Playing better players can only make you better once you've got a grasp of the basics - getting stomped on when you've no idea what's going on is no fun for the new player, and no challenge for the person winning...


How can a player not know whats going on? If he knows the rules he will KNOW whats going on obviously, if he doesnt know the rules - well then let him search rulebook/codex to whatever is happening and learn the game. 

Its not that termicide blowing up your tank will be something SPECTACULARLY MINDBLOWING and keep you thinking "what just happened" for 2 months, or outflanking unit will turn your world around. And not like hardcore 40k ace will have alot of wish to play against totaly newcomer anyway.


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

Siphon said:


> My minor annoyance is trivial and petty (I'll admit it) but I dislike the win/loss records people post up in their sigs. It seems rather childish. They almost all show as massive winners. Either you are telling the truth and want to show off/brag to gain attention and/or make yourself look good or you are lying for the same reasons which is even sillier. It's easy enough to have pride in your wins without parading some random number around on an internet forum in an attempt to impress people. There's literally no way to say it's not grandstanding since you didn't have to put it up and you obviously want people to see it. I can't help it, it just makes me snort every time I see it.


In defence of people (like myself) who post their win/loss record:

- There are probably some people who make up numbers in order to inflate their self esteem. Good for them. I think a brief trip to a counsellor would be more productive, but y'know, whatever works for you. However I think these people are in the minority.

- There are also people who post their real win/loss tally in order to prove how big a penis they have, how pro they are and whatever. Fine. Same advice as above.

However there are people who post their win/loss scores for a few valid reasons, for example:

- They actually want to keep track of how well they are playing, and a forum sig is an easy way to do it, rather than just having a word document with 4 words in it that you might forget about/lose. You would also have to take it everywhere you went. A forum sig you see every day and can be edited from anywhere with an internet connection.

- They want to emphasise the fact that they know what they are talking about. For example if I post something in a "How do I build an Eldar army list?" thread then hopefully other people will attach slightly more weight to what I have to say in light of my current tally. At the very least, it will lessen the chances of someone saying "Oh stfu, you don't know anything about it".

- They are actually proud of their achievements. Especially if a lot of the battles have been hard won, or you are noticably improving over a period of time. Why should I not be happy that I have only ever lost 2 games with my Eldar? Why can't someone be proud of himself in that one area of his life when (hypothetically) he's in a mediocre job with a wife who doesn't listen and kids who don't care?

A lot of your comments could equally be levelled at people who have won "Member awards" on this site. Why the hell do you need a big "I AM AWESOMZ LOL" badge underneath your avatar? What point does that serve?

You could also apply the comments to people who post pictures of their armies in the "Showcase" or "Project Logs" areas. Why would you post a picture of your Golden Demon standard army unless you wanted like 50 people to go "OMGOMGOMG You're the next Jesus!!1!"

I've obviously exaggerated slightly, but I hope it gets my point across. All of this is in the spirit of friendly debate, not a serious criticism of anyone.


----------



## The Son of Horus (Dec 30, 2006)

I can understand the complaint about the win/loss records. As someone who maintains one, it's actually for the sake of knowing how I'm doing as a player. Are there some win/loss records on here that are downright lies? Sure. And that's lame. Can I prove mine's valid? Nope. But as Sethis said, it's honestly just a convenient place to stick it.


----------



## KingOfCheese (Jan 4, 2010)

Im with the above posts.

Its convenient for me, and i am proud of my achievements, but i dont brag about them.

My playgroup is quite competitive, and as a result we like to keep track of our wins and losses.


----------



## Stella Cadente (Dec 25, 2006)

primeministersinsiter said:


> Don't worry about Witch King, he's gunning to be Stella-2.


damn clones, who do they think they are, there can only be one.

things that annoy me hey.

-GW's complete lack of interest or care for specialist games .
-players who insist on being competitive 24/7 for a game of toy soldiers.
-players who hate having there toys being called toys.
-ignorant competitive gamers who believe none competitive gamers should never give there opinions, just because we don't play competitive doesn't mean we don't know how to, so our opinions count just as much.
-players who lie about there W/L/D records, when you see something like W=10000/L=0/D=2 you know there lying, but you never know why, nobody is going to think your a better player just because you can make shit up, tell the truth and actually say W=0/L=10000/D=2 nobody will think less and might actually listen to you since your not a lying moron.
-players who belittle you and bully you for taking choices in your army that you want, competitive or not doesn't matter, if you want it you take it.
-players who win because of there list and not because of there skill with the list who believe themselves to be gods among gamers and that you should listen to them at all times and that they are right and you are wrong, when all they did was copy paste a list they saw on the net.
-Cheaters
-playing in GW, not because of the kids, but because of the adults who act worse than kids, some of my best fun games have been against younger players, but some of the older gamers are just utter pricks, jerks, assholes, wankers etc etc etc, and some of them need a bath.
-Male gamers complete unhealthy fascination with female gamers, as soon as a female chirps up and says "I play 40k" every single male is clambering to get inside her knickers and roll 2D6 for penetration (probably most rolling double 1), your sad pathetic individuals.
-people who think they can be the new stella muhahahahahaha


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

Stella Cadente said:


> some of the older gamers are just utter pricks, jerks, assholes, wankers etc etc etc, and all of them need a bath.


Fixed that for you.



Stella Cadente said:


> -Male gamers complete unhealthy fascination with female gamers, as soon as a female chirps up and says "I play 40k" every single male is clambering to get inside her knickers and roll 2D6 for penetration (probably most rolling double 1), your sad pathetic individuals.


I knew there was a reason I actually read your posts! :laugh: Nicely phrased.


----------



## TheKingElessar (Mar 31, 2009)

joebloggs1987 said:


> One thing that really annoys me...
> 
> Playing against players that have troops with no transports, overpriced HQ's, upgrades that are nowhere near worth their points, and units that are completely unplayable like possessed, kroot, etc.
> If you want to run them in your army, then thats fine. But for god sake dont bitch to me saying "your army is too cheesy", "your codex is overpowered", "your a powergamer", etc.
> ...


Exactly!!!1!

I fucking hate it when people bitch about the opponent using a competent army, because I actually like the thought of everyone using a good army and making the game challenging. If you run a shit army, and I run my NORMAL army, STFU when I grind you into the dirt. Why the fuck should I take a supplementary carrier case of bollocks units I wasted my hard-earned money on just to soothe your bruised ego?

There is no auto-win list in the fucking game, because no-one would play anything else, and therefore play at all.
Yes, some people copy army lists, and are still shit - big fucking deal. If they're still shit then prove it, don't just be a whiny bitch about it. If it turns out they still beat you, OMFGBBQ! Maybe they're actually just better than you at PLAYING, as well as list building!!!

Another thing that really gets my goat (lol) is people who think they know the game/their army better because they've played since 2nd/RT. I call bullshit. The rules have changed so much that you wouldn't recognise them as the same game, how the fuck can you know rulesets better than anyone else by virtue of experience with outdated rules?? More likely, you are misreading things, because you learnt it such-and-such a way, and don't bother to read the changes...I know a BA player argued with me for nearly half an hour that his Baal Predators could move 12" and fire all weapons, not because he's a dick (he is, though) but because he was using a hybrid of older rules and didn't understand that it simply wasn't correct - trying to make me out to be the bad guy because I actually read the words in the fucking books.

Also, I hate people who use the phrase 'rules lawyers' - So what? I actually learn the rules, because without structure we may as well all still be playing without Lego. If a FPS has a terrible physics engine, that's exactly the same deal as having a sloppy understanding of the rules. If you don't understand the rules, then you deserve to be cheated. I'm not saying there's ever a valid excuse or justification for cheating, or that you should know every army in the game...but if you don't know the basic rules, you deserve whatever you get.


----------



## Baltar (Aug 16, 2008)

Stella Cadente said:


> damn clones, who do they think they are, there can only be one.
> 
> things that annoy me hey.
> 
> ...


Too much truth in this post.

Especially regarding female gamers.


----------



## zrolimit (Sep 23, 2008)

Stella Cadente said:


> damn clones, who do they think they are, there can only be one.
> 
> things that annoy me hey.
> 
> ...


Stella youre a legend!!!!!


----------



## Cato Sicarius (Feb 21, 2008)

The Real Sanguinius said:


> In terms of person B, well, I dunno how old you all are, but, I recommend not playing against 12 year olds.
> 
> I know that this is a vast majority of 40k players (mostly those playing as Ultrasmurfs - the players with no imagination), but those without prepubescent levels of maturity are still quite plentiful, I'm sure.


Mind explaining why us "Ultrasmurf" (an OH SO ORIGINAL NAME) players have no imagination?

As far as I can see the only basis for this accusation is that we play a Chapter set down by GW, but you (as far as I can logically tell) play Blood Angels which would mean you have no imagination. Practically no one (or a rare few) has imagination in this game judging from your logic. I have seen 2 DIY Space Marine players in 3 years of playing the game. And one of those was literally a 12 year old.

On that note I would like to point out that in 3 years of playing I have won a total of 4 times, drawn thrice, and lost somewhere around 30 now. I have judged this on poor army composition, and am such changing my entire army list (something which I will no doubt enjoy). Why do I keep playing? Because it's *fun*. If I have a Sergeant and a Flamer Marine left in a squad with no support I won't run for cover, despite that being the sensible option, no, I'll go the fun route, I'll charge the toughest, closest unit I can find (usually Terminators) and see if I can do anything. If I can't, who cares it was worth a shot, if I can, wa-hey, a run down squad actually did something!

I used to play against cheese players. I quit the game for 4 months afterwards, as I thought I was a poor gamer. Really though, it doesn't make difference how you play, as long as you have fun, and quite frankly if you gain pleasure from grinding an amateur into the dust and bragging about it then I don't want to play you.


----------



## Inquisitor Varrius (Jul 3, 2008)

> -GW's complete lack of interest or care for specialist games .
> -players who insist on being competitive 24/7 for a game of toy soldiers.
> -players who hate having there toys being called toys.
> -ignorant competitive gamers who believe none competitive gamers should never give there opinions, just because we don't play competitive doesn't mean we don't know how to, so our opinions count just as much.
> -players who lie about there W/L/D records, when you see something like W=10000/L=0/D=2 you know there lying, but you never know why, nobody is going to think your a better player just because you can make shit up, tell the truth and actually say W=0/L=10000/D=2 nobody will think less and might actually listen to you since your not a lying moron.





> Too much truth in this post.


The Real Sanguinius, didn't you spend much of the thread against "casual" gaming?


And TKE, it's not about playing incompetently on purpose, it's primarily regarding new players. Don't impair yourself to sooth an ego, but consider toning it down before opening a can of whup-ass on a newcomer. If they know the rules and have played at least 3 times, go nuts. Otherwise, feel free to win, but don't pull a massacre by the third turn. Offer some helpful advice, suggest some better moves, whatever. It's neither a learning experience nor fun if your first game gets you tabled in 5 minutes.


----------



## Baltar (Aug 16, 2008)

It's a phenomenon that cannot be understood by a smurf player - sorry!


----------



## Baltar (Aug 16, 2008)

Inquisitor Varrius said:


> The Real Sanguinius, didn't you spend much of the thread against "casual" gaming?


No. I did not.


----------



## TheKingElessar (Mar 31, 2009)

FYI, I ahve been asked to do teaching games by GW staffers - not intro games, obvs, but games for players who've just got their army etc...ones beyond the intro stage, but not exactly regular players. Toning down my play to the level of the opponent in these gmaes is natural, and something only a total dickhead wouldn't do...but that's not the same as a pick-up game vs an unknown quality of player. If they tell me they're new, and I see them lift a unit of Swooping Hawks from their case, or a squad of Possessed etc, then I'll deploy like a retard, and hope I can play at maybe 70% of my ability from that point on. Otherwise it won't be any fun for me - if I could practically beat you/your list in my sleep then it's YOU who is doing the fun prevention here.


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

The Real Sanguinius said:


> It's a phenomenon that cannot be understood by a smurf player - sorry!


I'm sorry, can you qualify that statement in a non-derogatory fashion? If it stands unsupported then frankly you look like a biased idiot. Note the words "look like". Not "are".

Responding to valid points with an offensive label and an insult to the posters intelligence is not a good way to argue.


----------



## Skull Harvester (Mar 7, 2010)

I might end up on one of the annoyance lists, but wtf is a smurf player?

and do they get any saves against Gargamel?


----------



## primeministersinsiter (May 31, 2009)

Internet slap fight pool party! Everybody in!

Seriously, guys, we're starting to sound like a bunch of neckbeards.

@SH some people think people who paint their toys blue are noobs. The people that think that are often, but not always, rolling cunt waggons.


----------



## Skull Harvester (Mar 7, 2010)

primeministersinsiter said:


> Internet slap fight pool party! Everybody in!
> 
> Seriously, guys, we're starting to sound like a bunch of neckbeards.


I hear Maroon 5 is trying to make neckbeards cool


----------



## TheKingElessar (Mar 31, 2009)

Cunt wagon is a funny phrase. I think 'yoink' is appropriate, as I appropriate it. What a lovely sentence, if I do say so myself.


----------



## Skull Harvester (Mar 7, 2010)

TheKingElessar said:


> Cunt wagon is a funny phrase. I think 'yoink' is appropriate, as I appropriate it. What a lovely sentence, if I do say so myself.


. . . my head just blew up :russianroulette:


----------



## magic mike 626 (Oct 14, 2009)

my biggest thing is people not reading the rule book or codex.
1. today i saw a video by beasts of war explaining the rule about assaulting a squad that came out of a destroyed transport by the unit that destroyed the transport. rules like this which are clear as day and no room for interpretation just say to me that that person did not take the time to read the rules. 
2. the people who make the list that looks like this:
HQ: Force Commander, Chaplain, Librarian
Troops: Tac Squad
Heavy Support: 2 land raiders, Pred, Thunderfire Cannon
and when you try to help them out thinking they are a noob they tell you that have been playing for a while its like WTF.:ireful2:


----------



## Argitist (Apr 29, 2008)

The one thing that pisses me off about the game, is all the complaining people do. It seems the majority of people that play think it's part of the hobby. 

Thats sorta a joke, considering the thread, but so god damn true.

Fuck, Why can't I make a good list, do you all have to be-rate me for my effort? Why's everyone act so stuck-up when they say they "play for fun." Ugh, don't blame it on me when your not having fun because you aint doin well. 

Geez, I really just wish other games were more popular, so I wouldn't be stuck with 40k cause I want a weekly game.


----------



## TheKingElessar (Mar 31, 2009)

Skull Harvester said:


> . . . my head just blew up :russianroulette:


Welcome to the Kingdom of Gondor!


----------



## Azkaellon (Jun 23, 2009)

primeministersinsiter said:


> Don't worry about Witch King, he's gunning to be Stella-2.


Then that makes stella Always Right O.O?


And it seems lots of people agree with me


----------



## Chaplain Gaius (Mar 11, 2010)

whos stella


----------



## Stella Cadente (Dec 25, 2006)

Chaplain Gaius said:


> whos stella


some guy who always makes his opinions heard and refuses to sugar coat anything, from what I hear anyway, never personally met or heard of him.


----------



## VanitusMalus (Jun 27, 2009)

@magic mike: Who are you playing against that tries to pull an additional HQ and Heavy than allowed? You should smack them just for the audacity.

@the smurf debacle: There is nothing wrong with Ultramarines. I have never played them, even when I owned Codex:Ultramarines (2nd edition) but I have also never had a problem with them. I honestly like stock standard armies with versatility. An army isn't fun to play because it has a load of devastating special rule, an army is fun to play with because it has tactical versatility. So what GW shows the Marines love, that's GW's problem (because I'm sure those games designers and their creative muscles would love to revamp every army and probably add new ones yet they are slaves to the investors who say: "Marines sell, more marines"). I personally hate the Nids, hate 'em hate 'em hate 'em, but if a player pulls out a Nids army I'm more than happy to meet the challenge. I'm just weird like that, I love to face any force because no matter how bland, normal, or abstract they are still a challenge on some level.

@original thread: Another thing I hate are gamers who within the span on 2 seconds tells me I need to make armour saves for five units. Wait what?!?!? There is nothing worse than a gamer doing the following: Doesn't annouce any units, rolls dice to hit for several units, rolls to wound rolls, then annouces "Ok that unit needs to take 4 armour saves, that unit loses 3 guys because they were shot with a weapon that negates their armour save, you need to take 10 armour saves on that unit and you special character was instant killed" and I respond with "Wait what?". Fortunately 5th edition has attempted to make rules against this sort of behaviour, but you know some people...


----------



## Cato Sicarius (Feb 21, 2008)

Sethis said:


> I'm sorry, can you qualify that statement in a non-derogatory fashion? If it stands unsupported then frankly you look like a biased idiot. Note the words "look like". Not "are".
> 
> Responding to valid points with an offensive label and an insult to the posters intelligence is not a good way to argue.


I shouldn't really say this, but you sure shut that guy up. +rep man.


----------



## WarlordKaptainGrishnak (Dec 23, 2008)

i hate, watching a small Asian boy about 9 yrs, walk into a GW look at a Lictor on a display table, pick it up, and moving around the table, pretending to eat IG, while making lion noises. Then when told "be careful with that, it took a long time to paint and if you break it you'll have to pay for it" turning around and replying "i dont have any money". putting the lictor down and picking up a Valkyrie and start swinging it around making plane noises...

i strongly felt like back handing the git, for not showing an appreciation for the models someone, probably staff, had to spend their time on to paint to display.

and yes the player who gets shitting when his stuff is destroyed, funny for me but starts to drag the game down with the lack on enthusiasm of the opponent

WKG


----------



## Baltar (Aug 16, 2008)

Sethis said:


> I'm sorry, can you qualify that statement in a non-derogatory fashion? If it stands unsupported then frankly you look like a biased idiot. Note the words "look like". Not "are".
> 
> Responding to valid points with an offensive label and an insult to the posters intelligence is not a good way to argue.


No.

But I did rofl at the fact that "smurf" is seen as an offensive label. :biggrin:

Poor smurfs.


----------



## Marneus Calgar (Dec 5, 2007)

I get really annoyed when I lose. 

:laugh:

Nah, I get really annoyed at a few things, the really young people who want a game, and when I decide to pull a couple of vindicators and a thunderfire cannon out, they decide to say "Oh, no. I can't play a game, I was gonna play my friend today" just their "friend" never seems to turn up. 

People who have only just played the game and think they are the greatest thing since sliced bread . I love to beat them when that happens .

Oh, and people who think they know it all when they actually don't.


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

The Real Sanguinius said:


> No.


So you are in fact a biased idiot who has no rational reason for his hatred of blue painted space marines or the people who play them.

Have fun hanging out with the KKK, Neo-Nazis and the rest of this worlds bigots. The rest of us will continue to have rational debates in the interest of fostering mutual understanding and respect. :good:


----------



## primeministersinsiter (May 31, 2009)

@ Sethis : I don't agree with hating an army when it's painted blue because that's stupid, but you can't compare people who hate Ultramarines to the Klan or Neo-Nazis. They don't compare in the least. Anti-Ultramairne players haven't killed people. You're scrabbling for the moral high ground, it doesn't foster a very intelligent debate, and it's a cunt-move. Give it up.


----------



## TheKingElessar (Mar 31, 2009)

Let's dial it down to 3 or 4, huh guys?


----------



## Orochi (Jan 28, 2009)

I really hate the fact I an't pick between starting Tau or black legion.

I feel your pain.


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

primeministersinsiter said:


> @ Sethis : I don't agree with hating an army when it's painted blue because that's stupid, but you can't compare people who hate Ultramarines to the Klan or Neo-Nazis. They don't compare in the least. Anti-Ultramairne players haven't killed people. You're scrabbling for the moral high ground, it doesn't foster a very intelligent debate, and it's a cunt-move. Give it up.


If you hold an offensive belief that you cannot provide a reason for, you deserve exactly the same amount of respect as everyone else who holds such offensive views. Which is to say, none.

Whether it's thinking black people or jews are inferior, or thinking everyone who plays ultramarines is inferior, it's all unfounded bigotry and it saddens me to see it expressed by people I might otherwise enjoy talking to.

The fact that he hasn't killed anyone is immaterial. It's the thought process (or lack of one) that counts. I've said my piece, and that's as far as I'm willing to take it in a completely off-topic debate. If anyone wants to discuss it further then I'm open to PM.


----------



## Vrykolas2k (Jun 10, 2008)

People who build the power lists who don't actually own the models; they often don't explain what they've got until they're doing it.
For instance, a guy who decides his Obliterators are winged Lash Princes.
WYSIWYG is an excellent rule, which needs to be enforced more.

I'm not fond of the "one army fits all" crap, either. It encourages inbred thinking.


----------



## Baltar (Aug 16, 2008)

Sethis said:


> Whether it's thinking black people or jews are inferior, or thinking everyone who plays ultramarines is inferior, it's all unfounded bigotry


Yes, toy soldiers obviously compares to real life.

What a douche.


----------



## Skull Harvester (Mar 7, 2010)

You know what really grinds my gears?

When I can't find the droids I'm looking for


----------



## darklove (May 7, 2008)

Sethis said:


> If you hold an offensive belief that you cannot provide a reason for, you deserve exactly the same amount of respect as everyone else who holds such offensive views. Which is to say, none.
> 
> Whether it's thinking black people or jews are inferior, or thinking everyone who plays ultramarines is inferior, it's all unfounded bigotry and it saddens me to see it expressed by people I might otherwise enjoy talking to.
> 
> The fact that he hasn't killed anyone is immaterial. It's the thought process (or lack of one) that counts. I've said my piece, and that's as far as I'm willing to take it in a completely off-topic debate. If anyone wants to discuss it further then I'm open to PM.


I confess: I am an UltraMarine-ist! Lets get real for a second, you have to be a serious f***ing nut job to trivialise racism and xenophobia in the real world by comparing it to 40k. It is like comparing homophobia with a dislike of people that wear white socks with black shoes (those tasteless bastards!).

The prejudices of the real world are a very serious thing, and in many cases are a matter of life and death. Do not trivialise them with things like the above comments.


----------



## Snake40000 (Jan 11, 2010)

Ok will you guys stop... 
From being entertaining and interesting some people here are turning this into a stupid forum war....
One other thing that annoys me is people who are purposefully ignorant; you don't know who you are but everyone else does.


----------



## Baltar (Aug 16, 2008)

Snake40000 said:


> people who are purposefully ignorant; you don't know who you are but everyone else does.


This is a contradiction of terms.

For a person to be purposefully ignorant, then they would have to know that they were doing it.

So how could everyone else know about it, but not them?

Your own ignorance seems to be shining through k:


----------



## Stella Cadente (Dec 25, 2006)

people who think forgeworld items are underpriced overpowered unplaytested cheese.....who then play blood angels/space wolves/lash lists

WTF?


----------



## Skull Harvester (Mar 7, 2010)

Stella Cadente said:


> people who think forgeworld items are underpriced overpowered unplaytested cheese.....who then play blood angels/space wolves/lash lists
> 
> WTF?


You can't really judge BA yet. . . the codex isn't even officially out.


----------



## Baltar (Aug 16, 2008)

Stella Cadente said:


> lash lists
> 
> WTF?


I'm new to much of the slang going on.

What is a "lash" list?


----------



## Skull Harvester (Mar 7, 2010)

The Real Sanguinius said:


> I'm new to much of the slang going on.
> 
> What is a "lash" list?


I would assume dual DP with Lash spam.


----------



## Snake40000 (Jan 11, 2010)

The Real Sanguinius said:


> This is a contradiction of terms.
> 
> For a person to be purposefully ignorant, then they would have to know that they were doing it.
> 
> ...


"purposefully ignorant" As in the refusal of new or contradicting knowledge to there own.

Grats for proving my point.


----------



## Skull Harvester (Mar 7, 2010)

Snake40000 said:


> "purposefully ignorant" As in the refusal of new or contradicting knowledge to there own.


I think a better term would have been stubborn or refusal to accept other ideas. I get what you are saying though, know it alls that know nothing are rather annoying.


----------



## Baltar (Aug 16, 2008)

Snake40000 said:


> "purposefully ignorant" As in the refusal of new or contradicting knowledge to there own.
> 
> Grats for proving my point.


You didn't answer my question.

How can they not know if they are purposefully doing something?

I'm just curious.

You need to learn to accept criticism better, btw. Just a suggestion.


----------



## Stella Cadente (Dec 25, 2006)

Skull Harvester said:


> You can't really judge BA yet. . . the codex isn't even officially out.


just because it isn't out doesn't mean people haven't seen it, after all you can read it in GW or at an LGS


The Real Sanguinius said:


> I'm new to much of the slang going on.
> 
> What is a "lash" list?


2 daemon princes with lash, spam obliterators, and thats the basics, winning via spam and total ignorance of tactical play.


----------



## Skull Harvester (Mar 7, 2010)

Stella Cadente said:


> just because it isn't out doesn't mean people haven't seen it, after all you can read it in GW or at an LGS
> 
> 2 daemon princes with lash, spam obliterators, and thats the basics, winning via spam and total ignorance of tactical play.


Oh I agree, in fact I watched 2 games played with the new codex last friday. I'm just saying a lot of people haven't faced it in person, just read it on paper. Saying its overpowered after limited exposure is just a bit hasty if you ask me.


----------



## Stella Cadente (Dec 25, 2006)

Skull Harvester said:


> Oh I agree, in fact I watched 2 games played with the new codex last friday. I'm just saying a lot of people haven't faced it in person, just read it on paper. Saying its overpowered after limited exposure is just a bit hasty if you ask me.


for some yes I would agree, but I've read it quite closely and seen a few games played with it, and if used by an asshole, it is broken beyond belief, due to GW's thinking that not a single asshole plays 40k, so why make it asshole proof?..........oh how stupid they are.

I used to always say that was always the fault of the player not the codex, but these days the codex's are producing more assholes, so the tables have turned.


----------



## Snake40000 (Jan 11, 2010)

@ The Real Sanguinius Maybe next time you should try not insulting the person who you are criticizing... 

To answer the question
- "So how could everyone else know about it, but not them?"

Everyone else does not mean 100% of the population it is a hyperbole.
They may or may not know, again hyperbole, it would be more accurate to say they don't care and are fixed on the way they see the world are refused to be swayed into any other way of thinking. 

Any other criticism's or are you just gonna be insulting again?


----------



## Skull Harvester (Mar 7, 2010)

Stella Cadente said:


> for some yes I would agree, but I've read it quite closely and seen a few games played with it, and if used by an asshole, it is broken beyond belief, due to GW's thinking that not a single asshole plays 40k, so why make it asshole proof?..........oh how stupid they are.
> 
> I used to always say that was always the fault of the player not the codex, but these days the codex's are producing more assholes, so the tables have turned.


this makes me think of what happened to World of Warcraft honestly.

I agree, its like people back in the day during Mortal Kombat I and II. All they would do is sit in the corner and do the low sweep attack, then uppercut at a certain point.

Oh how people can ruin a great thing.


----------



## Baltar (Aug 16, 2008)

Snake40000 said:


> @ The Real Sanguinius Maybe next time you should try not insulting the person who you are criticizing...
> 
> To answer the question
> - "So how could everyone else know about it, but not them?"
> ...


If you read my post, I didn't actually insult you, at all.

Not unless you count being seen as momentarily ignorant, as insulting.

That would be an absurd thing to do, considering, at times, we are all victims of our own ignorance.


----------



## Snake40000 (Jan 11, 2010)

The Real Sanguinius said:


> Your own ignorance seems to be shining through k:


I consider this an insult. I understand that i am ignorant, but ^ is insulting.

Great; the crap i was trying to stop i got dragged into.


----------



## Skull Harvester (Mar 7, 2010)

Snake40000 said:


> I consider this an insult. I understand that i am ignorant, but ^ is insulting.


calling someone ignorant and calling someone stupid are two different things.


----------



## Baltar (Aug 16, 2008)

Snake40000 said:


> I consider this an insult. I understand that i am ignorant, but ^ is insulting.
> 
> Great; the crap i was trying to stop i got dragged into.


My smily is put there to make the tone one of jest. I can very much understand how written messages can be taken in some way other than as intended.

Especially when being prone to reading messages wrongly, myself.


----------



## Styro-J (Jan 20, 2009)

TBH, this doesn't seem to be your day Sanguinius. You seem to have struck several peoples nerves, today. Smiley's won't always save the day. Best to take a step back for a day, reevaluate the situation, and come back when everybody is more level headed about it after things have cooled down.


----------



## Inquisitor Varrius (Jul 3, 2008)

You know what really frosts my rhubarb? I dropped a brownie on the floor yesterday... ruined my baking. Bah!

Segueing back to 40k, I have a new pet peeve. There's a guy at my GW who leans on the table during games. In and of itself, that isn't a huge crime; it's just sometimes awkward to move units. However, this guy has arms roughly as big around as a tractor, and the board actually _flipped over_ when he leaned on it. :ireful2:

Oh, and I know this was completely out of context of the recent posts in this thread, but I'm trying to resurrect it as a friendly, 40k-themed griping fest. I like schadenfreude. 

@The Real Sanguinius: You may have better luck in a less formal tone. Try inserting some "lols," "brb," or other short hand acronyms. You sound rather serious, which seems to be over whelming your smilies. Try typing in a more joking, friendly voice, and people probably won't be as offended by an intended joke.

@People who are against The Real Sanguinius: I'm declaring my neutrality in all future harsh arguments in this thread. I will not confirm or deny which side I'm on, I'm just trying to help someone sound a little more funny, and less serious, ok? This seems to be a charged discussion, don't drag me in.


----------



## Snake40000 (Jan 11, 2010)

NO! NEVER The Real Sanguinius IS MY MORTAL ENEMY NOW!!!

Ooooo brownies can i stealz them?

I have a new one as well.... Babies, Yes I'm going there deal with it. Some Genius brought his 6 month old kid to a game. Some how da babbie managed to grab my opponents Ethereal right off the board. (He was near the edge.) When we finnaly managed to get it back; the Ethereal had seen better days, broken Honor Blade, drool, chips..... you get the picture. Lets just say no was very happy with said Genius.

Moral of the story; don't bring your kids to a game.


----------



## Baltar (Aug 16, 2008)

I have to agree on the babies thing.

But not just babies - parents with prams that think that they can use it as a battering ram to get to where they want to be,


----------



## Inquisitor Varrius (Jul 3, 2008)

You know what made me... well, annoyed might be the wrong word, more like mildly appalled. There was a kid and his mom in front of me in line once, and the it's the kid's birthday. 

"Mom, can I have a pair of those Titans? They're really cool and they shoot laser beams that EXPLODE YOUR HEAD!"

"I don't know (name omitted), didn't you already get that PS3 from us?"

"But Mommmmm. These are so cool!"

"Well... if you really need them."

"Can I get a battleforce too?"


Am I the only one who thinks that's a lot of cash for an 8 year old's gifts?


----------



## asianavatar (Aug 20, 2007)

People who aren't paying attention during games, so when you need to make a roll they are wondering around the store, but complain after that you are wasting time, thinking about a move.


----------



## keytag33 (Apr 20, 2008)

Inquisitor Varrius said:


> You know what made me... well, annoyed might be the wrong word, more like mildly appalled. There was a kid and his mom in front of me in line once, and the it's the kid's birthday.
> 
> "Mom, can I have a pair of those Titans? They're really cool and they shoot laser beams that EXPLODE YOUR HEAD!"
> 
> ...



I wonder if she would be willing to adopt me?

Something that annoys me is people who build a list in a vacuum. What I mean is they never look at how units work together or how to compensate for units weaknesses and then when you thrash them they complain that their army is broken and yours is too powerful.:threaten:

I would also like to second (or third) my hatred toward people who quit or start moaning as soon as they start losing:angry:


----------



## Inquisitor Varrius (Jul 3, 2008)

I'm not sure she'll adopt a 32 year-old; she looked about 25. On the other hand, maybe you should visit her house on Christmas, Hanukkah, Kwanzaa, whatever, and ask for a present. Maybe she'll have some cash bales she's been trying to burn. 

I object to the idea of vacuum lists. If you've never played, it's hard not to do. I play maybe... a game every other month? Maybe more. Anyway, it's hard to predict how a list will do without experience. I sympathize with your problems, however. It's never fun to play whiny, broken people.


----------



## Blue Liger (Apr 25, 2008)

asianavatar said:


> People who aren't paying attention during games, so when you need to make a roll they are wondering around the store, but complain after that you are wasting time, thinking about a move.


I hate this.

I also have a similar one where they are there. I declare my units shooting at my opponents unit and point to which unit of his I'm shooting and point back to my unit then I roll to hit and then ask what the armour save/toughness is so I know the wounding dice roll etc, and they turn around and say "wait what unit are you shooting at and which unit of yours is shooting, I wasn't paying attention". Seriously if your at the game table - your there to play a game not to jack off or whatever, it's a rule of common curtisy I mean you've accepted you want to play a game, you're there at the table and within 10 seconds or less you've lost your attention span


----------



## VanitusMalus (Jun 27, 2009)

@Babies: If you can't find a babysitter, either don't play or invite people to your house (this one guy I knew use to do this with pizza and beer for everyone). There's nothing worse than the screaming baby during game play, the curious baby/child with the dirty, sticky fingers grabbing everything, the bratty kid who takes your codex every chance he gets to look at the cool pictures, the kid who runs around the store and thus the parent keeps getting called away by the manager or store owner to get the kid, etc etc etc etc.

@People not paying attention: I hate the guy who walks off and talks to people while playing or goes off to have a cigarette. I mean we can always chose to take a break, you don't have to get involved in a deep philosphical conversation with someone outside while I'm doing my movement in turn 4.


----------



## TheKingElessar (Mar 31, 2009)

Blue Liger said:


> your there to play a game not to jack off or whatever,


Yeah, these people are really annoying - especially if they :shok: the uke: on the table...

Too much? Not enough? Just the right amount?:wink:


----------



## buckythefly (Mar 16, 2009)

This has got to be the greatest thread I have ever created. We've got people vs cheese, people vs babies, smurfs vs gargamel, Stella vs Evil Clone, Sanguiness vs Snake, Snake vs brownies, Orks vs Elves, Man vs Machine, and an asian kid making airplane noises.


Where did my poor thread go.


----------



## WarlordKaptainGrishnak (Dec 23, 2008)

buckythefly said:


> This has got to be the greatest thread I have ever created. We've got people vs cheese, people vs babies, smurfs vs gargamel, Stella vs Evil Clone, Sanguiness vs Snake, Snake vs brownies, Orks vs Elves, Man vs Machine, and an asian kid making airplane noises.
> 
> 
> Where did my poor thread go.


yes my post got read in the jungle of ^ things goin on here haha k:


----------



## The Thunder of KayVaan (Jun 19, 2009)

New one. when threads turn to the one like Games FAQs. I reall reall really REALLY hate them and find them rather boring, so guys lets chill in the Artic. :victory:


----------

