Why I give up

Quote :

I can't speak for the OP, but for me this would actually make things even worse in my mind. It would be the equivalent of someone letting me win.

Then you've missed my point or we just enjoy different aspects of the game. I find plenty of diversity in our book if the power level is toned down to allow those units a chance to function. It's not letting anybody win because this approach allows other underpowered bland codices the chance to display their options as well. I don't find our HQs nearly as bad as some say in this type of environment and it's refreshing to be able to field my models that would otherwise rot on a shelf.

There are some real stinkers in our codex but not nearly as bad as say blood angels. Yet I see some amazing blood angel armies, same with nids and orks, SW and GKs. We all got the shaft but get a group of players together that are willing to step away from higher points levels once in awhile and forgo allies and super heavies or clearly OP'd units and things even out pretty quickly. Its amazing how much more fun a game is when it includes a healthy dose of infantry btw instead of bikes/JMC/SHW/flyer spam etc. Pretty much pre apoc and pre 6th gaming.

We've also recently started maintaining our own FUQ/errata and thats done wonders for our fun level.

I've been miserable with various armies for many years in the past.. fighting ol' school mechdar with non rending asscan deathwing with 4++ invulns only in combat or getting stomped with my amazing wood elves army by OP'd dark elves and VCs waiting for a new book that took a decade and being bitter because GW wouldn't fix my toys. We'll I'm done buying into that mentality. We can fix things ourselves just fine. I love beer and pretzels and F*CK the tournament makes right mentality.

Brom wrote:

Then you've missed my point or we just enjoy different aspects of the game. I find plenty of diversity in our book if the power level is toned down to allow those units a chance to function. It's not letting anybody win because this approach allows other underpowered bland codices the chance to display their options as well.

See, that seems like a direct contradiction to me.

'If my opponents deliberately build crap lists, then I can use bad units and maybe win. But this doesn't count as letting me win. Honest!'

I'm not trying to be offensive here, I just don't understand your logic. If your opponents have lists that would let them beat your lists without issue, and instead choose to use weaker lists to give you a chance, then like it or not they're letting you win.

It's a bit like saying "well, my chess opponent started with only 1 Rook, 1 Bishop, 1 knight and 4 pawns, but didn't let me win!"

A handy cap system would allow for you to win but it is still playing with a handy cap, if a skilled boxer asked to box you and agreed to make it more fair for you to fight him by tying one hand behind his back would you feel any accomplishment for it? I wouldn't as I didn't beat the guy on my own, he assisted me by lowering the bar.

Don't get me wrong, a handy cap system is a great thing to use when someone is trying to learn a game but when both participants are experienced and know what they are doing then it is just another player taking pitty on you and deliberately tailoring his list to possibly lose. It feels as wrong to me as someone tailoring a list specifically to win.

CurstAlchemist wrote:

A handy cap system would allow for you to win but it is still playing with a handy cap, if a skilled boxer asked to box you and agreed to make it more fair for you to fight him by tying one hand behind his back would you feel any accomplishment for it? I wouldn't as I didn't beat the guy on my own, he assisted me by lowering the bar.

Don't get me wrong, a handy cap system is a great thing to use when someone is trying to learn a game but when both participants are experienced and know what they are doing then it is just another player taking pitty on you and deliberately tailoring his list to possibly lose. It feels as wrong to me as someone tailoring a list specifically to win.

You put it much more eloquently than I did. Kudos.

You are mistaken shredder. I'm playing regularly with my friends we are even playing a small campaign at the moment and I'm doing fine. Why? Because my friends don't take a scatter bike army. Or something similar. They aren't analyzing in terms of ' that's the most points efficient unit'. Of course they know what's good but the way you describe it, it's more like an Olympic sport. Less like a hobby.

May I ask where you're coming from shredder and Alchemist, that you are so fixated on competition?

Where I'm coming from is a group that plays 40k as a tactical wargame (as much as possible). Simple as that.

Incidentally, taking crap stuff "for fluff" (or some other contrived reason), quickly gets old after said unit has been wiped out for the 17th time by far more capable units.

I don't ask my friends to stupify their lists. And yet I'm not winning. Why? And friends of mine do field formations or do play guard with hydra flak tanks.

CptMetal wrote:

I don't ask my friends to stupify their lists. And yet I'm not winning.

I don't even know what point you're trying to make here.

Your friends aren't letting you win and so you're not winning? Um... okay.

I'm sick of that mentality that if you ask a friend to maybe not bring the ultra wraith knight only super cheese list, it's immediately considered as not worth winning. That hyper competitive.

What CptMetal means isn't "I build crappy army to let you win"... It's the concept that says: If everybody don't use the most OP build of their army, new strategies will appear. New battleplans. New experiences.

Yes, it is okay to ave a good army that will contest in great tournament. And you can do it. But, sometime, trying something totally new, even if less competitive, is refreshing.

I play with a Tau friend. One time, we switched armies, for fun. I had 3 crisis suits, and I decided to charge a 4 grotesques squad. It was a bad decision, and I knew it, but I was lucky with my dice, and wiped his squad. It was four years ago and I still remember that epic moment. But, no way I would remember the day X where I mass venommed him and won.

CptMetal wrote:

I'm sick of that mentality that if you ask a friend to maybe not bring the ultra wraith knight only super cheese list, it's immediately considered as not worth winning. That hyper competitive.

And I'm sick of people who think that an opponent handicapping himself to let you win somehow makes everything fine.

Not to mention people who think that removing a single OP unit from a list makes everything fine. Because a list can't ever be strong by just being really solid. No, every strong list must be relying on a Wraithknight or such - and once that's removed everything will be completely fine.

If my oponent isn't playing how he would like to play within reason then I don't feel that he will have fun playing against me and is just taking pity. I will begin by saying I play fluff lists (thus I tend to lose most of my games) if an oponent also likes to play fluff lists I'm fine with that, I don't feel that he is playing down to me but that he is just playing how he wants to.

However, if I'm waiting for a table and see that a player is using curtian toys against the other codices then comes to play a game against me and deliberately puts those same toys away I don't feel that he is playing how he wants but is instead taking pitty on me to give me a chance to win. There is no accomplishment, for me, in getting a victory with a pure DE list if my oponent doesn't field his army as he would like (within reason, not speaking of competitive list just about choosing to put things away that other Codices wouldn't warrant being taken off the table to make it "fair").

The Shredder wrote:

Brom wrote:

Then you've missed my point or we just enjoy different aspects of the game. I find plenty of diversity in our book if the power level is toned down to allow those units a chance to function. It's not letting anybody win because this approach allows other underpowered bland codices the chance to display their options as well.

See, that seems like a direct contradiction to me.

'If my opponents deliberately build crap lists, then I can use bad units and maybe win. But this doesn't count as letting me win. Honest!'

I'm not trying to be offensive here, I just don't understand your logic. If your opponents have lists that would let them beat your lists without issue, and instead choose to use weaker lists to give you a chance, then like it or not they're letting you win.

It's a bit like saying "well, my chess opponent started with only 1 Rook, 1 Bishop, 1 knight and 4 pawns, but didn't let me win!"

Hmm well I don't always get my point across like I mean to. What I'm getting at is that most players I know love their models and want to use them but theres this overwhelming.. thing that makes players feel like they have to buy into the arms race or their doing it wrong and it detracts from the game for more people than not.
The frustration expressed here and on other forums is real and valid but sometimes the source is not only GW, its also ourselves. We all have those models that have been lovingly converted and painted, like say land raiders or even wyches but they just don't stand a chance in todays no holds barred type of environments.

Anyway point is while the goal is to win the object is to enjoy it. Or maybe its vice versa idk but you get the idea.

I came across a little strong there because I hate to see players with great armies that are fun to game with and against get discouraged because their armies are invalidated by others. Conversely I love seeing said army function and give me a run for my money and I really don't care what list I build to make this happen. What purpose does a match serve if its not about skill? Oh my triple WK army crushed your fluffy red skulls kommandos force I'm a badass now. Right.

This is where we have the control to say I'll build a list that can give you a good game. Its not nearly as fun to table someone as it is to have that absolute slugfest that came down to one key run move or combat, at least to me and my main group.

So, it's not a handicap its a challenge. Take a force thats on relatively equal footing and see who comes out on top.

Ever try making and piloting a nid list without flyrants or FW? Or mechanized flash gitz themed orks, or tau with a freaking combat unit at its core?

I have been winning (and losing) with bad lists for a long time and its far more enjoyable to me then those games where I'm trying to win in the 'list building phase' which is what this game has essentially devolved into, if were being real here. And ya I do that too sometimes, when agreed before hand.

It started for me back when deathwing was left.. wanting, and I hated how badly my fully converted painted magnetized army with RT era LRs and such played by comparison, or in other words codex envy. I had half a full 1st company collecting dust. My buddies said 'just use the latest rules'.. but I felt dirty so I continued to self punish until GW finally wrote those magical little words in their FAQ. Wut? How silly is that looking back. Did it really validate anything? Did I really need to wait for them to do what my opponents had already offered because of some misplaced sense of legality?



To put it into perspective I have local gaming friends and some bros that are flying in from out of state less than 3 weeks from now. We've been planning a huge bash with 3 different levels: 1250 team play (pure lists) and 1500 singles (pure) with all these games agreed to be friendly level. The rules for 'friendly' aren't well defined or stone set and its intentionally not called a tourney despite being just that, because even using those monikers bring with them the sense of taking it right to the edge and its not about that.  

THEN we have a series of cutthroat games at 1850 which is ALL about that. Here I know full well that pure DE can't compete. For these I will dip into allies and its agreed that anything goes. My personal goal is to 'hate out' marines and eldar in general, and specifically bikes and deathstars because I know I can't TAC so I'm gonna likely sacrifice full mechanized matches and some others to crush those. Play your cheese and if you meet mine you'll cry..

We are also open to any reasonable suggestions for house rules that we will vote upon/have voted upon, such as ork boss nobs being Ld 8, cybork = 5++, nid regen = fnp, BA nilla units use C:SM equivalents, huskblade is ap2, soulfright has no limitation older DE characters are valid and so on. These will be allowed in the lower levels but not in the no holds barred level. Whats so hard about that? It took time to establish but once the barrier was initially broken and people saw the result it became no big deal.

Or in other words, WE make the game what it is, NOT the web NOT geedub. It takes effort and communication but in return I don't have to pretend we're helpless in determining how we have fun or that I'm stuck waiting for GW to do something about it.

Brom wrote:

What purpose does a match serve if its not about skill? Oh my triple WK army crushed your fluffy red skulls kommandos force I'm a badass now. Right.

Brom wrote:

I have been winning (and losing) with bad lists for a long time and its far more enjoyable to me then those games where I'm trying to win in the 'list building phase' which is what this game has essentially devolved into, if were being real here.

Brom wrote:

Or in other words, WE make the game what it is, NOT the web NOT geedub. It takes effort and communication but in return I don't have to pretend we're helpless in determining how we have fun or that I'm stuck waiting for GW to do something about it.

Thank you. That´s exactly what I wanted to say. If one plays in a "no limitations" environment, one shouldn´t be surprised if we get curb stomped. We can´t do that with pure Dark Eldar. But do we really have to?

Well not all of us have friends who play the game and instead are forced to rely on gaming clubs to find games if we wish to play. As such some of us have to rely on the rules as written in the books/Errata/FAQ from GW.

CurstAlchemist wrote:

If my oponent isn't playing how he would like to play within reason then I don't feel that he will have fun playing against me and is just taking pity. I will begin by saying I play fluff lists (thus I tend to lose most of my games) if an oponent also likes to play fluff lists I'm fine with that, I don't feel that he is playing down to me but that he is just playing how he wants to.

But DOES your opponent really WANT to play with OP full scatterlaser army? Or did he chose that build because it's the best and because he knows he will face other horribly OP armies?

Maybe there are somes units in his codex he likes, but don't want to take them because they aren't good enough. Lowering the level allow for everyone to use somes second-class units, and... HAVE FUN

dumpeal wrote:

But DOES your opponent really WANT to play with OP full scatterlaser army? Or did he chose that build because it's the best and because he knows he will face other horribly OP armies?

Considering that, with the investment required for a full Scatter Laser army, he could probably have bought a full army for just about any other miniature game, I think it's fair to assume that he does want to play it. That or he has waaaaay too much disposable income.

Haha probably a lil of both. We gamers tend to propagate what we also hate.

fng- "hey guys I wanna start a SM army are terminators any good?" Web- "unplayable. Scatbikes will shoot you off the board go with skyhammer instead and throw down with 8 units combat squaded and lolz."
fng- "how about a captain with jump pack and teeth of terra? I love captains and jump units..". web- "he sucks go with bike captain eternal warrior th/ss and make him iron warriors allied to white scars spam."

Cue next thread: "3+ armour saves are trash" and "how can we fix terminators?"



Off topic a bit but how many people here have actually organized anything like what I'm talking about? I ask because it didn't start off as something huge and it didn't even take off immediately. But it did and people went hey I can actually do that x&y army I wanted and read about in the inquisitor series and so on. And that's actually how some people go from random gamer guy to good friend. As opposed to I'll just show up with the absolute nastiest thing I can muster since I'm sure everyone else is gonna..

CurstAlchemist wrote:

Well not all of us have friends who play the game and instead are forced to rely on gaming clubs to find games if we wish to play. As such some of us have to rely on the rules as written in the books/Errata/FAQ from GW.

But don´t you meet some guys you fight regularely? Can´t you talk to them, form a battle group or something like that? Very good friendships have arisen from that hobby! And if you play friends, it´s much more fun because curb stomping isn´t the main goal anymore.

@Brom well, I play friends regularely. And we have some kind of loosely organized tournament. But not as big as what you are talking about. Maybe 8 people with 5 of them playing the mayority of the games. (One recently got a kid)

CptMetal wrote:

But don´t you meet some guys you fight regularely? Can´t you talk to them, form a battle group or something like that? Very good friendships have arisen from that hobby! And if you play friends, it´s much more fun because curb stomping isn´t the main goal anymore.

I play sporadically do to my other hobbies, work, and going back to university so while some of the guys are regulars there and friends I don't really make much of a connection with them when I do show up. Maybe I'm just not a likable guy that fits in with their crowd.

I've actually had the opposite playing with Dark Eldar lately, beating quite a few knights, necrons, sp marines, wolves, orcs, and a list with 20+ scat bikes

hq - archon wwp blaster
hq - archon wwp blaster
-- - medusa (3) venom
-- - mdusa(3) venom
tr - kabalites in venom
tr - kabalites in venom
el - blasterborn in raider
el - blasterborn in raider
fa - haywire scourges
fa - haywire scourges
fa - razorwing w sp cannon and necrotoxin missiles

The list gives flexibility allowing the archons to choose whether to wwp with the blasters or medusa depending on the situation. There is nothing quite like opponents declaring Dark Eldar overpowered and cheesy when 6 templates drop in, disembark just the archons, and erase 2 squads of marines and 2 drop pods while the venoms put 24 poison shots into another unit. The Blasterborn deep striking I have found to be a way more effective darklight platform, the ravagers are just too vulnerable. Its a fun list to play since everything deepstrikes and brings the pain ive watched many opponents just be totally unsure how to deploy.

Acolyte, What do you start with on the table turn one?

A unit of Kabalites outside of LOS perhaps?

My deployment depends a lot on the opponent, but typically the enemy will come to you. the goal is to get them to spread out on turn one and two so you can collapse a flank and then rush forward as your power from pain kicks in. Don't commit to unloading shots every turn, flat out will piss off your opponent way more. as soon as they commit to a flank, flat out and be 30 inches away leaving those silly 8" meltas and flamers shooting at the air, until 3 medusa webway in and melt their faces off.

against any army that doesn't have a knight or some other nonsense I need to drop lances on the trueborn start on board with the warriors out of range of everything and behind cover.

against nids the medusa start outside of their transport allowing you to place all the venoms on board on turn one which is key to try and kill one tyrant before it starts flying.

against knights everything but the scourges and trueborn start on table hidden as much as possible. the trueborn deep strike in the raider at an angle on the back and side of a knight so no matter what you will get to shoot at a side with no shield. this is a toss up game but watching one trueborn unit come in, kill a knight and have it fall over and blow up the rest of the adamantium lance is priceless.

in any case Dark Eldar are a great spoiler army, you do need a little luck and it will suffer sometimes. it also is much better at 1500 pts, above that we just don't have enough to escalate. at 1850 I add a dark artisan HQ bunker to the list and that has been pretty successful for pure DE.

Thanks for the insight @acolyte. Nice post