# What's your biggest gripe about 40k players online.



## tu_shan82 (Mar 7, 2008)

Hi folks, I know there's a thread in the off topic section of the forums, but I thought I would post this here. Personally I hate it when people talk about Space Marines, and they refer to them as Spess Mahreens. It really fucking annoys me. You don't have to like the army, in fact you can fucking despise them for all I care, but for the Emperor's sake use proper English when you talk about them. You may think it makes you look cool to call them Spess Mahreens, but in my honest opinion, it just makes you look like a complete and utter bell end. Anyway I now pose the question to you, what in particular about your fellow members of the 40k online community at large grinds your gears? It can be as big or as small as you like, but please share your thoughts. You never know, someone who is a culprit of your chosen annoyance may read your thoughts and alter there behavior accordingly, but probably not.


----------



## Lord Sven Kittyclaw (Mar 23, 2009)

The very vague and baseless comments along the lines of, "That unit isnt good, its to easy to catch in combat" To which of course somone replies, "if your good they cant catch you" 

or "Only a bad player would let that happen" Skill is so relative, especially in a game like this. That I just find those kind of comments asinine at best.


----------



## Stella Cadente (Dec 25, 2006)

your not doing it right, its SPESS MAHREENS, in caps, none caps just doesn't get the reatrded nature of SPESS MAHREENS across fully to the reader, practice this.

other than that I just hate the whole elitist attitude of some boys and girls of if your not playing the game to be an ass and table your foe on turn one your opinion in all matters (even none wargaming) is null and void.

and this whole that tournament is more valid than this tournament because I played in that one not this one BS.


----------



## XxDreMisterxX (Dec 23, 2009)

You know what grind my gears?? people who dont pronounce Space Marines -- > SPESS MAHREENS!!! and when they spell Ork --> Orc. lol jk. 

But to get back to OP, i would have to say when someone uses cuss words as much as they use any other word. Like they have fuck in every fucking sentence so it sounds like they are fucking hostile and superior because they dont give a fuck about what the fuck they are talking about. xD


----------



## darkreever (Apr 3, 2008)

Honestly, one of my biggest gripes has to be when some members see a post from others, like Stella, and the first thought is to bait them or troll them with little or no provocation. I can understand not liking some people, pretty safe to assume there is someone I don't like.

I mean gods be damned, grow up a little won't you? If all your going to do is be an ass to these people, your not being productive while they are being magnitudes more than you.


Hopefully that amount of cursing in a single post is not seen here; considering how it actually manages to go against the forum rules.


----------



## Tylith (Jan 10, 2011)

I hate when you ask for feedback on a list and people try to change it look like every other list online. I know 4 Trueborn with blasters in a Venom is effective, but I intentionally did not take them because it is overdone and imo overrated.

Oh, and the need to insult someone while arguing rules. It makes your argument almost invalid and you seem like a 4 year old. Grow up and argue with a little class.


----------



## Uber Ork (Aug 23, 2010)

tu_shan82 said:


> You never know, someone who is a culprit of your chosen annoyance may read your thoughts and alter there behavior accordingly, but probably not.


I love it... so true. :laugh:


I'm a fairly easy going guy, but there is one thing that can frustrate me. 

People who are arrogantly and verbally abusive against people who disagree with them. They berate others but fail to present their own argument in a logically, well thought out, well supported manner. They give their opinion like it is fact, offer no support for their claims (direct quotes from key sources + page numbers and/or links so you can check it out, etc.), and expect you to get in line because they are right and others are wrong. This frustrates me both when I see it happening to others, or when it happens to me.


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

People who make suggestions about changes to your army list that have nothing to do with the stated intentions of the list. Ditto for suggestions without giving a reason for the change.

People who just bitch and moan without actually contributing anything constructive, or making suggestions as to how something could be done better.


----------



## Trickstick (Mar 26, 2008)

I think most of the things stated here can be pretty annoying but I have a bit of a pet peeve that may not seem as bad.

Now I don't play blood angels but I hate it when people say that deepstriking landraiders are stupid. Have these people no concept of a thunderhawk transporter? It has the ability to carry a land raider and, lets see, drop it off in a battle and then fly away! I think most people have an image in their head of it dropping from the sky and smacking into the ground like a drop pod.

It's not really a problem as bad as the ones listed here but it just makes me angry when I see it.


----------



## WinZip (Oct 9, 2010)

40k players that think there right all the time and when you ask them to validate a point they say "because I know so, that's why,so don't argue with me!" And then, when you prove them wrong, they throw a huge hissy fit. Someone obviously didn't have enough cookies growing up.


----------



## Djinn24 (Jan 12, 2008)

Huge blocks of text with no paragraph breaks. I normally skip those in a hurry. That is about the only thing I have seen repeatedly on these forums that is annoying.


----------



## D-A-C (Sep 21, 2010)

People who write off vast swathes of codices because their calculator says so and who care about winning instead of having fun with their little plastic men.

Also people who dumb down anything to do with Chaos, and to a lesser degree, other aspects of the fluff.


Finally anyone who adds that internet voice to my posts online ... you know the one I'm talking about ... the one that makes me sound like an a**hole when you read back my posts.

In fact, I'm a pretty nice guy.


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)

People that think that playing to win and having fun are mutually exclusive. 

A clue: to us, it is the same damn thing.


----------



## ShotgunDiplomacy (Jan 18, 2011)

I've been on this about 5 mins but people really care about grammer....like really care me people take it a bit too serious grammer is good yea but don't crucify someone for it:/


----------



## Trickstick (Mar 26, 2008)

D-A-C said:


> In fact, I'm a pretty nice guy.


Oh no! My internal voice is making me think you are a jerk! Nooooooo!

Yeah it is annoying when people completely misread your tone and take the most negative interpretation of what you said. I still advocate that there should be some kind of general internet /sarc convention to convey sarcasm.


----------



## Alsojames (Oct 25, 2010)

People that flip out over the tiniest things. Like a small, insignificant rule debate. And people that rage over fluff.

Hey, I like the Tau fluff, dammit!


----------



## D-A-C (Sep 21, 2010)

gen.ahab said:


> People that think that playing to win and having fun are mutually exclusive.
> 
> A clue: to us, it is the same damn thing.


I'm going to take a shot in the dark and assume that was directed at me.

If not, that's one heck of a coinky dink, huh?


A clue: to me it's obviously not.


----------



## Katie Drake (Nov 28, 2007)

gen.ahab said:


> People that think that playing to win and having fun are mutually exclusive.


This, but more to the point, intolerance of other people's preferences. Being told that my preferred way of enjoying _my hobby_ is wrong or somehow inferior to someone else's preferred method of enjoying _their_ hobby really grinds my gears.


----------



## bitsandkits (Mar 18, 2008)

ShotgunDiplomacy said:


> I've been on this about 5 mins but people really care about grammer....like really care me people take it a bit too serious grammer is good yea but don't crucify someone for it:/


You mean "grammar", its important, as is spelling.


----------



## darkreever (Apr 3, 2008)

Trickstick said:


> I still advocate that there should be some kind of general internet /sarc convention to convey sarcasm.


In the end it would not matter; unless a specific tone is your intention, people will read things as they want to read them. Someone wants to have a problem with you, they will be looking for a problem regardless of what you say or how you word what you say.

I remember the last time I dealt with someone like that at length. The though of forgoing the consequences and misusing the banhammer was a mighty one that day.


----------



## Vaz (Mar 19, 2008)

Sethis said:


> People who make suggestions about changes to your army list that have nothing to do with the stated intentions of the list. Ditto for suggestions without giving a reason for the change.


Although I'm guilty of it in particular in Fantasy, this, absolutely. Or the fact that there list is somehow the best as it has a quasi unbeatable deathstar man for man (I remember Nob Bikers being one until people began to realize that you can actually use Melta effectively against Orks)


----------



## D-A-C (Sep 21, 2010)

Katie Drake said:


> This, but more to the point, intolerance of other people's preferences. Being told that my preferred way of enjoying _my hobby_ is wrong or somehow inferior to someone else's preferred method of enjoying _their_ hobby.


Katie ... I hate to be the one to tell you ... but:

Your way of enjoying your hobby is wrong and inferior to my way, which is right, and I'm completely intolerant of any other points of view.

Forcing everyone to enjoy their hobby, the way I enjoy my hobby, IS MY HOBBY.


----------



## Igni Ferroque (Dec 7, 2010)

I hate the fact some players are so far away from me... yes I know, Random... but its the fact that I can't battle people who think they no everything, and hopefully prove that they don't.

The lack of being able to actually play people is a major gripe to me sometimes... Seriously now folks, stop camping off in other countries so I can play you all!

Thats my main gripe, and sometimes grammar and spelling drives me up the walls. Oh and people who hide snide comments behind smilies. "But I was just having a laugh!" Yeh right!


----------



## Flayed 0ne (Aug 29, 2010)

no complaints here...your all just like family :laugh::wink::rofl::yahoo::grin:

...:shok:

...seriously though...i love this site...even the stuff that drives me guano...at the end of the day...ive spent way too much time here lol


----------



## Stella Cadente (Dec 25, 2006)

gen.ahab said:


> A clue: to us, it is the same damn thing.


its not when your idea of fun means sapping all the fun out of the game for everyone else except yourself.
"lol I tabled you in 2 turns, I had so much fun being a dick"
"...I didn't"
"why should I give a shit about your enjoyment?, what do you think this is a game or something"


----------



## Tyrannus (Sep 19, 2010)

Pretentious twats and people who bring nothing to a debate/thread i.e A thread were a guy is ranting about something and asks for others opinions and some guy replies with a "Get over it" or "Stop complaining". Those really irk me just because it seems like you're just baiting and trying to increase your post count.

And people who just right "I agree" or ":goodpost:"

Once again, people trying to increase their post count and bringing nothing to the discussion in hand.


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)

Stella Cadente said:


> its not when your idea of fun means sapping all the fun out of the game for everyone else except yourself.
> "lol I tabled you in 2 turns, I had so much fun being a dick"
> "...I didn't"
> "why should I give a shit about your enjoyment?, what do you think this is a game or something"


No, that isn't fun for _*anyone*_. I like to play other competitive players; when I play I want some form of challenge. What I don't want to do is table some poor, pathetic, player in 2 turns because, for one thing, it is a waist of my time, and two, it makes them feel like shit.


----------



## XxDreMisterxX (Dec 23, 2009)

Heresy has what other sites lack...... Drama. lol :so_happy:

Also another annoyance... Why cant everyone just get along? :biggrin:


----------



## D-A-C (Sep 21, 2010)

XxDreMisterxX said:


> Heresy has what other sites lack...... Drama. lol :so_happy:
> 
> Also another annoyance... Why cant everyone just get along? :biggrin:


Wouldn't be much drama if we did, now would there? Lol.

EDIT

About the post below this one ... hot chocolate = awesome.


----------



## Trickstick (Mar 26, 2008)

Tyrannus said:


> Pretentious twats and people who bring nothing to a debate/thread i.e A thread were a guy is ranting about something and asks for others opinions and some guy replies with a "Get over it" or "Stop complaining". Those really irk me just because it seems like you're just baiting and trying to increase your post count.
> 
> And people who just right "I agree" or ":goodpost:"
> 
> Once again, people trying to increase their post count and bringing nothing to the discussion in hand.


I agree. (-:

Another slight annoyance of mine would be the w/l/d things you see in signitures. Now I can see that most people who do this do it to simply keep a record of their games but every time I see it it just makes me think you care about the record more than the game; plus you could just be lying anyway. Just another little thing that irks me about forums i suppose. I don't mean I automatically consider people who do it to be worthless, it just lowers my initial expectations a bit. After reading some posts I usually change my mind.

Now I'm in a real grumpy man mood, trying to think of things that annoy me. That doesn't sound like a great use of time, trying to make myself angry. Time for a hot chocolate!


----------



## Stella Cadente (Dec 25, 2006)

Trickstick said:


> plus you could just be lying anyway.


I am stunned, how could you say that somone with a W/L/D ratio of 1456/0/1 could possibly be lying? 

plus after beating on new players something has to stroke there egos.


----------



## Nave Senrag (Jul 8, 2010)

D-A-C said:


> Finally anyone who adds that internet voice to my posts online ... you know the one I'm talking about ... the one that makes me sound like an a**hole when you read back my posts.


Very well, from now on, all of your posts will be read to me by Microsoft Sam. :laugh:

Honestly, the worst problem I've seen is people deciding that another person's viewpoint doesn't matter because it is different than theirs, the most common being the my idea of the hobby vs your idea of the hobby so beloved by certain trolls. 

Second to that would be those with atrocious grammar. I can understand spelling mistakes, and basic stuff, but when a paragraph is smushed together, or a sentence is so poorly written that it is impossible to glean any information from it.


----------



## darkreever (Apr 3, 2008)

Stella Cadente said:


> I am stunned, how could you say that somone with a W/L/D ratio of 1456/0/1 could possibly be lying?


Its hard to see something like that as true when I refuse to put my ratio of 1/0/1456 in my sig.


----------



## Vaz (Mar 19, 2008)

XxDreMisterxX said:


> Heresy has what other sites lack...... Drama. lol :so_happy:
> 
> Also another annoyance... Why cant everyone just get along? :biggrin:


Other sites don't have it because they're not man enough to have a proper discussion about it. Moderating is not stopping potential fights - you're not the police, no-ones life is in danger, so don't prevent a verbal bitch fest - however, stop it WHEN it gets out of hand, as has happened recently to me, over a certain tank.

Do I give a fuck? No. Did I get banned? No. Did I stop? Yes! If I'd have got banned, would I be saying "If I'd not got banned, would I have stopped?", Yes.

So... sucks to Whoreseer then =).


----------



## bitsandkits (Mar 18, 2008)

my personal pet hate is what i consider "underage" players, this isnt so much a problem on the forum, but i hate to see players who are not mature enough to play the games, kids are forced to grow up too fast as it is these days without there parents shipping them off to GW every weekend as a form of childcare, its just sad standing in a shop and thinking i have socks older than some of these players and its what makes it worse is you then become a magnet to the staff members because they think one of the kids is yours and your his portable cash machine or the staff member just wants to take refuge in your company to escape the madness, nothing worse than seeing a blackshirt welling up with tears while he hangs on to your trouser leg pleading for you to stay so he does not have to over see another 40k game who's players have less pubic hair between them than a Bangkok lady boy after a back, sac and crack


----------



## ChugginDatHaterade (Nov 15, 2010)

A few things about forums piss me off to no end.

1-When someone posts an army list with some kind of god awful idea, like 5 dark reapers with full exarch upgrades in a wave serpent with star engines, vectored engines, and starcannons. When you point out that this is a really bad idea in every way, they bitch about how its fluffy. Well say that in your army. If your list says "heres my fluff bunny funtime biel tan list" I wont bother commenting. If you just post a list I will tell you what I think about it. Dont respond by berating me.

2-People who derail list threads by giving bad advice. Yeah, we get it, walking burna boys do great in your crappy lgs metameta, they dont anywhere else. Quit telling people to buy walking burna boys, you are just wasting peoples money and hurting the hobby. If you feel that fluff wise 30 walking burnas is cool, ill agree, but game wise it sucks. 

3-People who complain about win/loss ratios in the sig. Yes I have one, yes its real. No its not me crushing beginners right and left, its every game I have played in the last 3 months or so. 

4-People who ignore a fucking argument. Seriously? You posted 2 sentences, I posted 2 paragraphs refuting your argument, at least give me the decency of a well thought out reply. Not any of this "well thats just your opinion" bullshit. 

5-People who take some kind of moral high ground because they lose a lot and run shitty armies. How fucking retarded can you be. Those of us who get out understand that its just a game. I have 3 armies that I have played in the last 6 months. Nids, sanguinary guard heavy blood angels, and loganwing. Only one of those is a competitive army, and I only bring it out at some tournaments or pre arranged games against people who want to play it. I own no tanks for any of those armies and win most of my games. Most all of my armies are built based on rule of cool as opposed to a pure meta list building style. 

But seriously, running footdar doesnt make you any better than anyone else. You are sitting on the internet whining about people running better armies and beating you in warhams. Stop with the strawman argument bullshit, sure there are assholes in tournament play, there are also assholes in casual play. The guy who shows up and watches your game for 2 hours while commenting on the army not syncing with his idea of the fluff. The retard who bitches about how mechdar are for girls, and then his manly men space wolf army loses even though he should have won by all normal standards. The guy who brings 4 baneblades to a 2000 point game because he thinks its fluffy, and then whines about fucking deathcompany with powerfists being broken because they killed a baneblade. Losing doesnt make you better morally than winning. Losing doesnt mean your opponent was a jerk. Losing almost always means you made more mistakes than your opponent. If you are a casual player than just play for the fun of the game and dont worry about winning or losing. Otherwise you are a competitive gamer of one type or another, either a real competitive player or a WAAC douche. So either become casual or quit bitching, or take responsibility for your own losses, and improve your game.


----------



## bitsandkits (Mar 18, 2008)

i also hate people who use the number 4 instead of 5


----------



## turel2 (Mar 2, 2009)

The thing that gets me is, people that don't know Squat about Squat. (or Zoats for that matter.) /jk

Fluff Nazism/any elitism/ having no respect for others can be very annoying.


----------



## Fallen (Oct 7, 2008)

ShotgunDiplomacy said:


> I've been on this about 5 mins but people really care about grammer....like really care me people take it a bit too serious grammer is good yea but don't crucify someone for it:/


Did you run into Katie? :search:



gen.ahab said:


> People that think that playing to win and having fun are mutually exclusive.
> 
> A clue: to us, it is the same damn thing.





Katie Drake said:


> This, but more to the point, intolerance of other people's preferences. Being told that my preferred way of enjoying _my hobby_ is wrong or somehow inferior to someone else's preferred method of enjoying _their_ hobby really grinds my gears.





Stella Cadente said:


> its not when your idea of fun means sapping all the fun out of the game for everyone else except yourself.
> "lol I tabled you in 2 turns, I had so much fun being a dick"
> "...I didn't"
> "why should I give a shit about your enjoyment?, what do you think this is a game or something"


^ all this.

ive got two...pet peevs i guess

1) in armylists people who just post up an inventory of their stuff and in short ask "can someone write me a good list?"

2) people who post just for the sake of posting - to get Jez's Dark Disciple award - please do quality posts at least.


----------



## Vrykolas2k (Jun 10, 2008)

XxDreMisterxX said:


> You know what grind my gears?? people who dont pronounce Space Marines -- > SPESS MAHREENS!!! and when they spell Ork --> Orc. lol jk.
> 
> But to get back to OP, i would have to say when someone uses cuss words as much as they use any other word. Like they have fuck in every fucking sentence so it sounds like they are fucking hostile and superior because they dont give a fuck about what the fuck they are talking about. xD


Watch your fucking language, you fucking fuck.

In seriousness, people who treat their opinions as emperical fact are highly annoying.


----------



## Lord Sven Kittyclaw (Mar 23, 2009)

Fallen said:


> 2) people who post just for the sake of posting - to get Jez's Dark Disciple award - please do quality posts at least.


This. As hypocritical as it sounds, I only got the award by a hair's breadth, unlike some people posting arbitrary and useless threads by the dozen. and a hint. Everyone knows your doing it.


----------



## .Kevin. (Jan 10, 2011)

When people complain about armies
People who argue rules when you can give them the page in the rulebook yet they still choose to be total nutsacks about it.
Got your ass whipped by Space Marines? Who gives a fuck stop whining it annoys me when I see in another thread they talk about skill and it's just - hello retard you were whining about rules or someones army in another thread.

I remember back when smurfs was as bad as it got for marines but seriously you look like a shit when you turn into a tool with the whole saying what everyone else says crap.


----------



## turel2 (Mar 2, 2009)

Lord Sven Kittyclaw said:


> This. As hypocritical as it sounds, I only got the award by a hair's breadth, unlike some people posting arbitrary and useless threads by the dozen. and a hint. Everyone knows your doing it.


I agree.

It would better to reward quality posting instead.

Everyone that is posting silly amounts of new threads in off topic is cheapening the whole Dark Disciple Award.

Quality posts > Spam threads.


----------



## buckythefly (Mar 16, 2009)

I like how 98% of the community is in the top 2% of skill level. How that works is beyond me.


----------



## ItsPug (Apr 5, 2009)

gen.ahab said:


> People that think that playing to win and having fun are mutually exclusive.
> 
> A clue: to us, it is the same damn thing.





Stella Cadente said:


> its not when your idea of fun means sapping all the fun out of the game for everyone else except yourself.
> "lol I tabled you in 2 turns, I had so much fun being a dick"
> "...I didn't"
> "why should I give a shit about your enjoyment?, what do you think this is a game or something"


This.

Stella (and others), playing to win is not the same as cheating or being a prick. If you have a troops unit 5" from an objective, and you need to take it to win the game, by moving it onto the objective you are playing to win. If you don't want to do that, why play the game at all? Just line up your men and have the enemy shoot them, 'cause obviously if your shooting back you're "playing to win!"


----------



## D-A-C (Sep 21, 2010)

Fallen said:


> 2) people who post just for the sake of posting - to get Jez's Dark Disciple award - please do quality posts at least.





Lord Sven Kittyclaw said:


> This. As hypocritical as it sounds, I only got the award by a hair's breadth, unlike some people posting arbitrary and useless threads by the dozen. and a hint. Everyone knows your doing it.





turel2 said:


> I agree.
> 
> It would better to reward quality posting instead.
> 
> ...



That's actually really funny, because I hate people accusing *me* of spamming threads to just get an award.

You know, like going onto a thread that has 80+ responses and saying 'hey this is a spam thread'. as you suggested Lord Sven Kitty Claw. That sure is one heck of a spam thread huh?

In fact, you know what, I'm going just assume that those comments are directed at myself and ask would anyone care to examine the threads I've started and please point out the spam?



As it stands, I've only encountered one person who spammed threads IMO and that was DrinCalhar and his 10+ Dark Eldar Army Lists. But that isn't in the off topic section now is?

So I guess, posting multiple army lists is annoying as it discourages others from helping people with their lists.


Also 'passive aggressive' sniping (as someone called it) at people is kind of annoying too, as we all know who you are and that you are doing it.


----------



## Aramoro (Oct 7, 2009)

Fallen said:


> 2) people who post just for the sake of posting - to get Jez's Dark Disciple award - please do quality posts at least.


I've trolled loads of posts and not got one yet so I assume there is some quality level you have to meet. 

People take the game too seriously, it's just a game. A game involving man-Barbies no less. It's meant to be a fun hobby to pass the idle hours before the grave, nothing more.


----------



## Katie Drake (Nov 28, 2007)

D-A-C said:


> In fact, you know what, I'm going just assume that those comments are directed at myself and ask would anyone care to examine the threads I've started and please point out the spam?


I know we don't always get along and all, but D-A-C, chill. I really didn't get the impression that anyone was accusing you of spamming or doing much of anything. Someone posted that they wish that some (nobody in particular) people would post more substance as they aim for their new thread quota for the month. There's really nothing personal implied there (that I see, anyway).


----------



## Jezlad (Oct 14, 2006)

What fucks me off is when people call rumours tidbits, or talk about whispers and chatter in the wind... it's fucking retarded.

I follow West Ham religiously, every transfer window there are dozens of rumours floating around. Never has there ever been mention of the word "tidbit".

My guess is a bellend or someone off Warseer used the word initially, maybe Bigred or that Brimstone before he rolled over... then it kind of spiralled from there and now every other cunt uses it too.

Anyway, that's what really fucks me off.

*wanders off towards the chatter looking for tidbits and a salt shaker*


----------



## Jezlad (Oct 14, 2006)

> That's actually really funny, because I hate people accusing me of spamming threads to just get an award.
> 
> You know, like going onto a thread that has 80+ responses and saying 'hey this is a spam thread'. as you suggested Lord Sven Kitty Claw. That sure is one heck of a spam thread huh?
> 
> In fact, you know what, I'm going just assume that those comments are directed at myself and ask would anyone care to examine the threads I've started and please point out the spam?


people will bitch mate no matter what you do.

Looking through your threads started its clear to me that 80% of them have been successful. Some have dozens of replies...

If every member of the forum was able to create interesting threads and generate hundreds of additional posts in a month we'd very quickly become the biggest and busiest 40k forum online.

As it is they don't, can't be arsed and instead choose to be negative and hinder the forum by insulting others... 

So for those slating DAC...(who at this current time is one of the forums most cherished members - yes that is official - I decided it) stop bitching and start some discussions... thats the point right? On a discussion board?



> It would better to reward quality posting instead.
> 
> Everyone that is posting silly amounts of new threads in off topic is cheapening the whole Dark Disciple Award.



Define quality posting?

If we were rewarding what I believe you mean by quality only 2 or 3 people would get the reward. (on any forum in our niche)

This is a toy soldier forum populated predominantly by teens, the socially defunct and introverted... this isn't a Webmaster forum, the average IQ isn't 140, 90% of "quality" is averted in favour of a good fight or laugh anyway.

Most decent posters these days abandon forums to create blogs. (there are exceptions, some even do both) Very rarely will someone post quality for the benefit of others when they can carve out their own corner of the internet on a free hosted blog.


----------



## Aramoro (Oct 7, 2009)

I heard a whisper on the wind that DAC is actually Jezlad.....or that could be the absinthe I drank last night.

Another things I hate is people posting lists with this at the bottom



> Anyone got any thoughts or C&C? Really looking to make this competitve


So you reply with something constructive and you get



> MY LIST IS PERFECT YOU MORON. YOU'RE OBVIOUSLY A BAD PLAYER.


Wait what? You asked for C&C.


----------



## Stella Cadente (Dec 25, 2006)

I also hate the fact that people insist there is no such thing as cheese, no unit is cheesy, yet have no clue what the definition of cheese/cheesy is
2. Informal Of poor quality; shoddy.
2: Informal banal or trite; in poor taste.
2: (informally) Trite, contrived, cliche. Often of poor quality; shoddy.
2. Slang. inferior or cheap; chintzy:
1: ☆ Slang 1. inferior; poor 2. tasteless; tacky
1: inferior, poor, shabby, sleazy, trashy, worthless
thats 6 definitions all saying the same thing just from searching for cheesy, so what they are saying is no unit is poor/bad/poor quality/inferior yet these people label units as such every minute of the day and create lists that are tasteless/tacky/cheap/sleazy everyday, like BA assault squad spam, thats cheesy because its tasteless and tacky.


----------



## the cabbage (Dec 29, 2006)

To answer the OP I just dislike the amount of rude arseholes you find everywhere on the net. So it's not particular to heresy but this is the discussion board I use most so this is where I see it most.

It is easy to tell if you are doing it. If you type something in a 'tone' you wouldn't use to a drunk cagefighter in a pub then you are being a dick. It is particularly prevalent on the rules discussion board I find.

I would call them net-heroes and in our defense here at heresy it is less common than other sites.

Another common annoyance is posters who treat thier post count relative to others as an indication that thier opinion carries more weight. Bore off.


----------



## ChugginDatHaterade (Nov 15, 2010)

You do understand that cheesy in 40k terms has nothing to do with taste and everything to do with power. You also understand that words can take on different meanings in different areas of life. To most people the term clip refers to whatever holds the ammunition for a gun, but more specifically its a certain kind of ammo holder. 



> like BA assault squad spam, thats cheesy because its tasteless and tacky.


youre a fuckin wee bawbag m8


----------



## Stella Cadente (Dec 25, 2006)

ChugginDatHaterade said:


> youre a fuckin wee bawbag m8


your insult drives deep in my heart, I am wounded by a 12yr old, forsooth the stab of thy verbal blade do stab at thy heart, the wound is deep, death beckon me........oh wait no it don't.

I'll stick to what a dictionary tells me what the meaning of cheesy is, since this game is based on the english language, instead of what a group of people playing with toys decide what a word means.

especially a 12yr old


----------



## ChugginDatHaterade (Nov 15, 2010)

The English language was decided by a group of people too. Various communities make up their own terms for things, which is why the Chinese dont speak the same language at all as the Arabs, they grew up separately. Read more Wittgenstein please.


----------



## darkreever (Apr 3, 2008)

ChugginDatHaterade said:


> youre a fuckin wee bawbag m8


Oh my look at that, its my very gripe in this thread. A member attacking and trying to provoke Stella for little to no reason. Thank you Chuggin for making sure everyone has a clear cut example for me.


----------



## Kreuger (Aug 30, 2010)

My big gripes are grammar/spelling and the debate I've had a few times that boiled down to: how the fluff interacts with the rules changing over time.

On grammar and spelling - We are all here to communicate, hopefully effectively about wargaming and the related parts of the hobby. In my experience posts that are sloppy, rife with misspellings, and nonsensical sentences only detract from the discussion. In all my years reading/posting on the internet, I have never once struggled to the end of a poorly written post and had an epiphany or shouted "eureka!". Yet, I find it surprising that those same posters are unaware how careless they look. They aren't 3 years olds showing off a new crayon masterpiece to a parent, they're writing to other teens, young adults, or adults.

I don't call names, bash, or crucify members for sloppy posts, but if you don't have something worthwhile to say - and a worthwhile post can be funny, snarky, sarcastic, informative, simple, elegant, erudite, even brilliant or inflammatory - don't post anything at all.

And on retconned fluff and related rules - I'm not telling other people how they need to play/write their armies, but I refuse to accept that whatever is in the current fluff is the best it's ever been. I'm sure some of it is much better, but the back stories and character (of especially Chaos) isn't what it once was. And there is no reason to 'deal with it'. Editorially and critically I think parts of it were stronger in years past. Regardless of whether or not Chaos ever returns to some of those ideas, when GW started simplifying the game in an attempt to make it appropriate for 10 year olds (read: 3rd ed) they removed a lot of strong content. There's just no way deities of perversity, blood-lust, decay, and betrayal are going to appropriate for young kids.

Anyway, I have my view of Chaos and I won't be abandoning it anytime soon.


----------



## D-A-C (Sep 21, 2010)

Here's another one:

A**hole (usually American) players who turn 40k, which is a hobby, into a sport where winning is what it's all about. 

They then go about setting up tournaments whose sole purpose isn't having fun and socialising, but rather winning, and being able to raise your hands in the air and shout 'Oh Yeah I'm Awesome!!!!' at the end while everyone claps and bows down and worships your awesomeness.


That is to say the people who ruin one of the most engaging and complex science fiction stories ever created, that has some beautiful models, that allows people to show of their artistic merit either through painting, or drawing or some other medium and which often brings people together with the purpose of having fun and a good time and thereby creates friends for life.


The people who take all that good natured and positive energy and turn it into ... I WON I WON I WON I WON!!!!

That bothers me immensely and is a side of the HOBBY (that's right a frickin distaction from the daily stressess of life) that is increasing every single year.

So more and more you have whiny little 10yo's on one side and competitive a**holes with the mentality of 10yo's (or less) on the other.

That tends to bother me :biggrin:

(Oh and incase your wondering what that has to do with online, that mentality is becoming more and more obvious in all 40k websites, particularly in army list and tactic discussions for our favourite little plastic men)


----------



## Vaz (Mar 19, 2008)

ChugginDatHaterade said:


> To most people the term clip refers to whatever holds the ammunition for a gun, but more specifically its a certain kind of ammo holder.


Actually, to most people, a clip refers to exactly that - a clip.


----------



## D-A-C (Sep 21, 2010)

ChugginDatHaterade said:


> The English language was decided by a group of people too. Various communities make up their own terms for things, which is why the Chinese dont speak the same language at all as the Arabs, they grew up separately. Read more Wittgenstein please.


Don't name drop intellectuals to sound smart.

How about you read more:

Marx, Lenin, Mao, Althusser, Adorn, Habermas, Zizek, Marcuse, Balibar, Nietzsche, Foucault, Berger, Ranciere, Deleuze, Heidegger and probably a whole bunch more I'm forgetting.

(All of whom I have read and studied, (Sarcasm) woooo aren't I smart, my opinion is so much more valid now)


----------



## Lord Sven Kittyclaw (Mar 23, 2009)

But your just dropping names to look superior. He was referencing a source for his claims.


----------



## ChugginDatHaterade (Nov 15, 2010)

D-A-C said:


> Don't name drop intellectuals to sound smart.
> 
> How about you read more:
> 
> ...


Wow, the stupid award goes to you sir. Not only is Sven Kittyclaw correct, I was referencing a source for my claims, but terrible strawman arguments dont make you look very smart.

Im not certain if someone who makes the kind of low quality arguments you do would be capable of studying any of those people in any kind of serious manner. Let alone just reading them on your own time.


----------



## humakt (Jan 2, 2008)

Vaz said:


> Actually, to most people, a clip refers to exactly that - a clip.


Now thats what I call a smart red paperclip. Personally clip makes me think of film clips, and not even remotly about guns.

I like the way this thread has got off track with people doing exactly what other people dislike.

My dislikes with 40k are people who isnsist everything must be WYSIWYG or that all modesl are painted or that you cant have proxies. The game is supposed to be fun, not some kind of tournament to see who has the deepest pockets and the most time to waste putting brush to figure.


----------



## D-A-C (Sep 21, 2010)

Lord Sven Kittyclaw said:


> But your just dropping names to look superior. He was referencing a source for his claims.





ChugginDatHaterade said:


> Wow, the stupid award goes to you sir. Not only is Sven Kittyclaw correct, I was referencing a source for my claims, but terrible strawman arguments dont make you look very smart.
> 
> Im not certain if someone who makes the kind of low quality arguments you do would be capable of studying any of those people in any kind of serious manner. Let alone just reading them on your own time.


Well I think the two of you should keep the stupid award.

Who the f*ck brings up Wittgenstein on a 40k forum unless they are trying to be a smart*ss?

It would be like me saying Althusser says blah blah blah, so that's why you should take Kroot instead of Tau Firwarriors.

Why don't we all start lacing all our points with intellectuals, heck involve Baudrilliard because maybe this whole argument is a Simulacrum anyway, blah, blah, blah.

By making a point that (you felt) needed referencing to an overrated intellectual you were trying to be a wise a**, fact.

Also you were discussing the f*cking nature of language, and as far as I'm aware this ain't a linguistics class now is it?

Point stands: You were being a smart*ss.


----------



## ChugginDatHaterade (Nov 15, 2010)

Poor DAC, cant get into any kind of discussion without it being some kind of horrible battle for survival. 

hey fuckhead, guess what? Stella brought up a point that I felt could be refuted through linguistics. If I say I have 10 marines rapid firing bolters, so thats 30 boltgun shots, would you then point out that it is in fact 20 shots? Or would you decide that this isnt a math class and move your happy ass along.


----------



## Baron Spikey (Mar 26, 2008)

-I hate people who act like complete twats purely to get attention, and I mean in the most obvious way- like they'll insult someone, get some rep off someoneelse for this (another pet peever, why the hell do you 'reward' someone for being a dick?) and think "_oh if I act like a spoiled moron people will respect and like me more_".
No we won't, we hate you and are laughing *at* you not with you- but they don't seem to realise this and actually bitch that they're not accorded the respect they 'deserve' if someone doesn't praise them.

-People who will rip into someone but then claim they're being bullied and run squealing to the staff if someone else says even the slightest thing that could be construed as 'mean' to them (you know who you are).

-My own and others arrogance. I know I can be condescending and arrogant when discussing fluff, it's something I'm trying to curtail, but there's really no reason for it from anyone. You're not the be all and end all of any part of the hobby, there will always be someone better at whatever you think you're good at.


----------



## Tyrannus (Sep 19, 2010)

D-A-C said:


> Well I think the two of you should keep the stupid award.
> 
> Who the f*ck brings up Wittgenstein on a 40k forum unless they are trying to be a smart*ss?
> 
> ...


So you fight fire with fire?
You rebuff a smartass comment with your own smartass comment?

It's a different way to go about things. But to each his own I suppose.


----------



## buckythefly (Mar 16, 2009)

Really Haterade? Really? the last three threads I've been on have devolved to 30 people telling you your wrong, and you arguing for 10 pages with ultimately you thinking your right and everyone else disagreeing. Can you just, Not. You know, maybe post on the original topic or something for once.


----------



## Lord Sven Kittyclaw (Mar 23, 2009)

But ignore the fact he didnt start the arguement?


----------



## Wusword77 (Aug 11, 2008)

D-A-C said:


> Here's another one:
> 
> A**hole (usually American) players who turn 40k, which is a hobby, into a sport where winning is what it's all about.
> 
> ...


This mentality is what I hate about 40k players online. Aside from the fact I don't like the comment about Americans making the game competitive (because nothing was competitive before America came around it seems), the idea that a tournament isn't about having fun and socializing is just absurd.

This has been covered by many people in this thread already (Gen.Ahab, Katie, Chug, ItsPug, and Fallen) so I'm not going to repeat what they have said again and again in this thread.


----------



## ChugginDatHaterade (Nov 15, 2010)

> This mentality is what I hate about 40k players online.


This, if you arent man enough to handle losing a game you need to rethink a lot of things in your life.


----------



## XxDreMisterxX (Dec 23, 2009)

Haha. Stella, your a true mastermind of Chaos.  I now respect you if I hadn't before. I see you have mastered the ways of confusion and internal strife, managing to make others fight like rabid dogs for a bone that does not exist. xD


----------



## Viscount Vash (Jan 3, 2007)

What is my biggest gripe about about 40k players online? 

The same thing that goes for any other random group of people online, I suppose.
The courage that stems from the safety of a computer screen resulting in rude fukwits, probably would be mine.


----------



## XxDreMisterxX (Dec 23, 2009)

I dont see why DAC would nit pick Americans because thats just stereotyping and because 
A. I'm one. 
B. Seeing as GW holds annual tournaments in which a lot of 40k players compete in, with the win at all cost mentality mind set. Also Everyone who competes in it come from several different nationalities and countries.
Summary: Americans are not to blame, but do have their problems and may be more prone to the stereotype then most other people.

Also i would have to disagree with the statement that 40k has to be played to win. Sure i would like to win but sometimes maybe i get sick and tired of winning or i just dont take the game that seriously and just wanna screw around like say "maybe i wanna orbital strike everyone in this giant melee here even when my troops are in there to see who would survive? Lol it would be good fun and amusing, but very bad for me since i just wasted an important ability though i wouldnt really give a crap since I'm not looking to win anyway." 

Fun and Win. two different words with two different meanings and means to obtain. 

eeek... need to post another gripe to stay with OP, umm... I would gripe about people stuck in their own schemas and who are as close minded as a cork in a bottle.


----------



## Stephen_Newman (Jul 14, 2009)

By biggest dislike. Well where to begin:

1. Players who when posting a list only others assume that they only want the list to be competitive and suggest a load of stuff that they consider good. I once saw a person who clearly wanted an army from Alaitoc and the first 5 players all suggested he took Eldrad. WTF?! The guy stated he wanted to avoid Ulthwe so we'll all suggest it. Morons!

2. People like Chuggindathaterade who just assume that their point of opinion is right and considers himself within the top 5% of players (Yes he openly admitted this!) and just shouts you are wrong to whatever argument you throw his way. Way to go man! Also pretending you are from Russia and 12 years of age is just plain attention seeking and makes you look like a complete ***.

3. People who assume that playing to win is the same as playing casually in the sense that it is fun. No it isn't! When you win I bet you are all happy like because you're list beat the other guys list with superior skill. Yet when you lose I bet you ain't as happy. Course you're not and don't pretend otherwise. You go back and try to find another way to win. Whereas a casual player is still happy regardless of result because he just enjoyed playing the game in the first place. After losing he just laughs whilst having another sip of his beer/whatever he is drinking at the time.

4. People who post ridiculous theories with little or no evidence or have little in the way of hard evidence in the theory but rather utilise circumstantial evidence to their claims. Yes I am looking at Lux since he suggested the Emporer is a C'tan it is something he will never recover from. Or the time I think he suggested that Night Haunter is still alive because a marine impersonated a Callidus assassin. Think again please.

Now awaiting a torrent of reasons of why I am wrong which thus proves that I am right.


----------



## TheSpore (Oct 15, 2009)

Im sick of Noob players that decide to be daemon players and then constatnly complain that the army sux. Practice makes perfect and its the only way u can understand and learn the army. Hey I play daemons all the time and win just as much as i lose.people who bash others just for having their own unique ideas for paintint their army and refuse to thiink outside the box

Now on the table top i hate rules lawyers,kids that want to touch your models. people that refuse to even take the tiime to prime their models or eve attept to paint them.


----------



## lastdaysofhumanity (Nov 29, 2010)

I hate that the online 40k community wastes so much energy arguing in threads like these instead of all enjoying the hobby each in their own way.:smoke:


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)

Stephen_Newman said:


> 3. People who assume that playing to win is the same as playing casually in the sense that it is fun. No it isn't! When you win I bet you are all happy like because you're list beat the other guys list with superior skill. Yet when you lose I bet you ain't as happy. Course you're not and don't pretend otherwise. You go back and try to find another way to win. Whereas a casual player is still happy regardless of result because he just enjoyed playing the game in the first place. After losing he just laughs whilst having another sip of his beer/whatever he is drinking at the time.


Horse shit. Yeah, we might not be all that happy about losing, but if it was a hard fought battle then it was fun. Yes, we(I) play to win and like to be competitive, but that doesn't mean I can't have fun if I still lose. You don't have any fucking clue what we think, yet you are still arrogant enough to think that you do. We like to play competitively, but that does not mean that if we lose we will go into some butthurt tantrum. If we(I) lose it means the other guy/gal is/was better than I am/was and I need/needed to get better. I treat it as a fun game, but also as a learning experience. So yes, if we do lose we will try and improve, but how is that a bad thing? In all things, if we find ourselves lacking we should strive to improve. That is life.


----------



## Wusword77 (Aug 11, 2008)

Stephen_Newman said:


> 3. People who assume that playing to win is the same as playing casually in the sense that it is fun. No it isn't! When you win I bet you are all happy like because you're list beat the other guys list with superior skill. Yet when you lose I bet you ain't as happy. Course you're not and don't pretend otherwise. You go back and try to find another way to win. Whereas a casual player is still happy regardless of result because he just enjoyed playing the game in the first place. After losing he just laughs whilst having another sip of his beer/whatever he is drinking at the time.


If what you said was true the whole debate about casuals vs competitive players wouldn't happen ever.

Casuals complain that "Spammy/WaaC/internet lists/players beat me every time." The whole crux of the argument is that you LOSE to a competitive list/player. Casuals just happen to lose harder against a competitive list, in that you get "tabled" at some point and aren't able to mount much of an offence.

I can bet that if you were winning against those spammy/WaaC/internet lists/players you would feel pretty good about yourself. Don't even try to deny it, because we all like to win at some point while playing a game.

By your own words Casuals should have nothing to complain about because they don't mind losing as they just enjoy rolling dice and moving minis around. Your logic fails rapidly in that whole paragraph.

Edit: Damn Ahab you beat me to it =)


----------



## turel2 (Mar 2, 2009)

Jezlad said:


> Define quality posting?
> 
> If we were rewarding what I believe you mean by quality only 2 or 3 people would get the reward. (on any forum in our niche)
> 
> ...


There's always room for a laugh and a fight, it keeps the threads interesting. :wild:


----------



## turel2 (Mar 2, 2009)

D-A-C said:


> In fact, you know what, I'm going just assume that those comments are directed at myself and ask would anyone care to examine the threads I've started and please point out the spam?


It's ok, i'm not accusing you of spamming.


----------



## Katie Drake (Nov 28, 2007)

Stephen_Newman said:


> 3. People who assume that playing to win is the same as playing casually in the sense that it is fun. No it isn't! When you win I bet you are all happy like because you're list beat the other guys list with superior skill. Yet when you lose I bet you ain't as happy. Course you're not and don't pretend otherwise. You go back and try to find another way to win.


Gonna have to agree with gen.ahab here. It's pretty incredibly presumptuous to flat out say "No, you don't think/feel this way" to someone considering that the person who's thinking the thoughts or feeling the feelings in question would know what's going on a lot better than someone else. That... was a much clumsier sentence than I intended it to be, but hopefully it makes sense.

This past Sunday I played in a three round tournament at my local game store. In an incredible display of incompetence, I only came away with one win out of three games. Do I wish I had won all of my games? Yes. Is the amount of fun I had diminished because I didn't have a great showing this month? No. In fact, my second game was one of the best that I've played in recent memory - certainly the best since the release of 5th edition about two years ago. Guess what? I lost by a single Kill Point to a close friend whose list I helped write. There was no throwing of a temper tantrum, hard feelings or anything else. Instead, we both just laughed, shook hands and carried on having a good time. So don't go telling us how we have fun, how it is that we think or how we have fun because we'd know better than anyone else.


----------



## Deathscythe4722 (Jul 18, 2010)

SPESS MAREENS is the canonical pronunciation. For reference, see Dawn of War: Soulstorm.

It is very clear that in the grim darkness of the 41st millennium, there is only SPESS.


----------



## Stephen_Newman (Jul 14, 2009)

gen.ahab said:


> Horse shit. Yeah, we might not be all that happy about losing, but if it was a hard fought battle then it was fun. Yes, we(I) play to win and like to be competitive, but that doesn't mean I can't have fun if I still lose. You don't have any fucking clue what we think, yet you are still arrogant enough to think that you do. We like to play competitively, but that does not mean that if we lose we will go into some butthurt tantrum. If we(I) lose it means the other guy/gal is/was better than I am/was and I need/needed to get better. I treat it as a fun game, but also as a learning experience. So yes, if we do lose we will try and improve, but how is that a bad thing? In all things, if we find ourselves lacking we should strive to improve. That is life.


OK. Lets back up a second. What I mean to imply is that yes you may still have "fun" losing but you are stil disappointed on some level that you lost. I am not trying to suggest you go on some temper tantrum when you lose but you are not as happy as you could be if you won. fun is linked to happiness in my head so it makes sense to me.



Wusword77 said:


> If what you said was true the whole debate about casuals vs competitive players wouldn't happen ever.
> 
> Casuals complain that "Spammy/WaaC/internet lists/players beat me every time." The whole crux of the argument is that you LOSE to a competitive list/player. Casuals just happen to lose harder against a competitive list, in that you get "tabled" at some point and aren't able to mount much of an offence.
> 
> ...


You are right in the sense that the argument between competitive vs casual should not happen. Those who truly are casual like me and use whatever they like and play in their own style regardless of the consequences and still enjoy just the game or highlight particulary funny points. Those who do moan about competitive players do not play casually enough in my opinion.



Katie Drake said:


> Gonna have to agree with gen.ahab here. It's pretty incredibly presumptuous to flat out say "No, you don't think/feel this way" to someone considering that the person who's thinking the thoughts or feeling the feelings in question would know what's going on a lot better than someone else. That... was a much clumsier sentence than I intended it to be, but hopefully it makes sense.
> 
> This past Sunday I played in a three round tournament at my local game store. In an incredible display of incompetence, I only came away with one win out of three games. Do I wish I had won all of my games? Yes. Is the amount of fun I had diminished because I didn't have a great showing this month? No. In fact, my second game was one of the best that I've played in recent memory - certainly the best since the release of 5th edition about two years ago. Guess what? I lost by a single Kill Point to a close friend whose list I helped write. There was no throwing of a temper tantrum, hard feelings or anything else. Instead, we both just laughed, shook hands and carried on having a good time. So don't go telling us how we have fun, how it is that we think or how we have fun because we'd know better than anyone else.


Maybe I am wrong to associate every competitive player as I do. But the majority of players do fit my opinion. Please note I am not attacking you directly or think of you any less. I am just listing my opinion.


----------



## Boc (Mar 19, 2010)

Stephen_Newman said:


> OK. Lets back up a second. What I mean to imply is that yes you may still have "fun" losing but you are stil disappointed on some level that you lost. I am not trying to suggest you go on some temper tantrum when you lose but you are not as happy as you could be if you won. fun is linked to happiness in my head so it makes sense to me.
> 
> Maybe I am wrong to associate every competitive player as I do. But the majority of players do fit my opinion. Please note I am not attacking you directly or think of you any less. I am just listing my opinion.


Of course I'm disappointed if I lose. But as long as the person I lost to wasn't a complete douche (which luckily there are few of around here) and generally fun to BS with and spend time with... I still have fun. Just because I'm disappointed in my performance, the usual "Ah I should've done this action to get a better result" doesn't mean we're pissy and mopey, just looking to improve ourselves in a hobby that we enjoy playing.

I got off track a bit... but winning is rewarded in society through progression, losing and not caring or trying to improve yourself is ridiculous as well as a cause for the downward spiral of society, because people think that if they got a 10th place trophy in swimming when they were kids that they don't suck, and that they're special.

To echo Katie's sentiments on tournament performance, at my first tournament the only game I won was against a kid who brought 1200 pts to a 1850 tourney just so he could learn to play. That game we only got through 3 turns, because I was trying to help him learn the rules and how to utilize his units to their maximum effectiveness against my own (amg, but I'm a WAAC asshole!). I got curbstomped, but still enjoyed each game but one, and that was because of the crotchety old bastard I played against, not the game itself. The other players were all pleasant to be around and that's really what makes the hobby enjoyable, not necessarily winning every time and crushing people... although crushing guys that are dicks does bring an incredible amount of satisfaction.

Hello, my name is Boc, and I'm an elitist.

But it's okay because I'm pretty much awesome.


----------



## Katie Drake (Nov 28, 2007)

Stephen_Newman said:


> Maybe I am wrong to associate every competitive player as I do. But the majority of players do fit my opinion. Please note I am not attacking you directly or think of you any less. I am just listing my opinion.


It _is_ wrong to paint every person in a particular group (be it social standing, race, sexual preference or how someone pushes around their toy soldiers) with the same brush. The majority of players _in your area_ might fit this stereotype, but there are plenty who don't as well. In fact, out of my entire group I can think of exactly one person who gets all upset when he loses and he thinks that tournament play is akin to the devil himself. Funny how it's the non-competitive gamer in my group that gets upset when he loses, isn't it?

My group isn't anomalous either. I've traveled hours in almost any given direction from my home to play 40K at different stores and events. The number of people who are truly WAAC and cannot enjoy themselves unless they're absolutely pasting their opponents is extremely small. Ask any of the other competitive gamers on this site how their group is and I'd be willing to bet you'd get a similar answer the vast majority of the time.

Oh and no, I don't feel attacked directly.  I realize that you're only stating your opinion which is perfectly fine - I'm just attempting to illustrate that taking an extreme stance on something often causes one to miss the mark by a fairly wide margin.


----------



## Aramoro (Oct 7, 2009)

Are you not doing the same thing? Categorising all gaming groups as the same as yours and thus the non-competitive gamer being a sore loser and by extension all non-competitive gamers are sore losers.


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)

Aramoro said:


> Are you not doing the same thing? Categorising all gaming groups as the same as yours and thus the non-competitive gamer being a sore loser and by extension all non-competitive gamers are sore losers.


I don't think she is, she is trying to illustrate the point that she found this one person, who happened to be a non-compet, that hated to lose. Basically, she is saying that most groups are fairly diverse, but at the same time most people aren't jackasses. At least I believe that was what she was getting at.


----------



## Katie Drake (Nov 28, 2007)

Aramoro said:


> Are you not doing the same thing? Categorising all gaming groups as the same as yours and thus the non-competitive gamer being a sore loser and by extension all non-competitive gamers are sore losers.


Uh, no? I made every effort to explain that it isn't just my group that I play with and never once said that all casual gamers are sore losers. I mentioned one person in an attempt to illustrate that it's perfectly possible to take losses badly despite not being competitive.



gen.ahab said:


> I don't think she is, she is trying to illustrate the point that she found this one person, who happened to be a non-compet, that hated to lose. Basically, she is saying that most groups are fairly diverse, but at the same time most people aren't jackasses. At least I believe that was what she was getting at.


Yes, this is exactly it. I was starting to worry that I'd managed to completely fail to make my point.


----------



## D-A-C (Sep 21, 2010)

I just don't see the appeal of competitive gaming as opposed to the more casual approach.

You can all rip on me and accuse me of trolling, but I'm obviously just not getting it.

It's just logical to me.

Non-competitive players, when they lose, immediately talk about the epic moments during the game and how they would be in our imaginations and the fluff. Therefore both players have a good time, and rarely will the game result in many list changes after the game.

Competitive players, play to win and so the fluff and painting / modelling aspect of the hobby are sidelined (although not entirely) so as to focus on army composition, tactics, unit power and table top competitiveness. 

During their games, someone must lose. They might not 'feel' sad (although I bet alot do), but after getting beat, they will go back and explore the faults of their list and cast units aside in favour of superior ones. Also just to reiterate; someone must lose, there is no win-win scenario were they can laugh and share moments of the game, except in a manner which involves, avoiding such mistakes next time.


The problem with competitive gamers is that they treat 40k as a sport, which revolves around winning and losing and coming in first place. They research lists and unit strengths / weaknessess and plan two-three turns ahead during games.

Non-competitive gamers highlight the fact that 40k is a hobby and a pass time. They enjoy using their imaginations during dice rolling, rather than mathhammering the tactical ability of Unit A to Kill Unit B. Rather they usually make things up as they go along, with some awareness of a Unit's strengths and weaknesses, but they usually will sacrifice a Unit in the name of a cool moment.



Examples:

*Non-Competitive Idea:* 'Hey, it would be so cool if my Librarian charged that Bloodthirster and killed it, let's give it a go!'

*Competitive Idea:* 'Statistically that Librarian will win the combat with his Bloodthirster 1/25 times, as it has x3 attacks vs Toughness 6 which equates to only 0.578 wounds ...'
*
Non-Competitive After Game Chat:* 'Remember when my Librarian (insert custom name), charged your Bloodthirster (Insert custom name), and it managed to score all three wounds with x3 6's, that was awesome huh? "Back to the warp you foul daemon! The Emperor protects lol!"

*Competitive After Game Chat*: 'Yeah that was a real mistake using that Librarian against that Bloodthirster, I'll never do that again!' OR 'Statistically speaking there was no-way your Librarian should have scored those three wounds and me fail my three saves.'

*Non-Competitive Next Game*: 'Ready for a game? Same lists as last time, only my Bloodthirster is out for revenge I'm going to try and kill that damn Librarian and get some payback!'

*Competitive Next Game: *'Yeah I changed up my list this time, I dropped the Librarian and instead went with Mephiston, I also changed A, B, C and learned a few new tactics and hopefully I'll win this time.'


But hey, each to their own huh?


----------



## Katie Drake (Nov 28, 2007)

D-A-C said:


> But hey, each to their own huh?


Exactly. :victory:


----------



## D-A-C (Sep 21, 2010)

Katie Drake said:


> Exactly. :victory:


Well said k: .


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)

D-A-C said:


> *Competitive Next Game: *'Yeah I changed up my list this time, I dropped the Librarian and instead went with Mephiston, I also changed A, B, C and learned a few new tactics and hopefully I'll win this time.'


Well if I used a BA Libby I should have used SS. However, why would I use Mehpy? He isn't very competitive. :laugh:


----------



## Boc (Mar 19, 2010)

The real big fault, as has been pointed out, is assuming someone is all-competitive or all-casual...

The fact that people see this as completely black and white as opposed to having gray area in between is absolutely astonishing.

But yes, to each his own, no matter to what extent you are color blind.


----------



## Scathainn (Feb 21, 2010)

Holy fuck, this argument is still going?

Biggest peeve: People who ignore the golden rule of DON'T FEED THE TROLL. At least Stella is a good troll so when people feed him his reply is entertaining. But when you get into bad trolls like D-A-C you get threads like this, 10 pages of whiny bitching.

And yes, D-A-C. You are a troll. And you're terrible at it too.

EDIT: Which is ironically me feeding the troll itself :grin:


----------



## Aramoro (Oct 7, 2009)

Katie Drake said:


> Uh, no? I made every effort to explain that it isn't just my group that I play with and never once said that all casual gamers are sore losers. I mentioned one person in an attempt to illustrate that it's perfectly possible to take losses badly despite not being competitive.


Ah you mentioned the fact that your non-competitive guy was a sore loser, and then said your group was not amonalous. Implying that most groups the non-competitive guy is a sore loser. Hence my confusion.


----------

