I guess Im randomly asking but does any of you know a way to get back into an instagram account?? I was dumb lost the account password. I would love any tips you can offer me.
@@AlmostProGaming in all seriousness i've had the same experience with competitive people and i ( very recently) learned to be more relaxed in some games :) i feel you thanks for the awesome video as always ^^
@@FilosofoDaCamera Yeah this story is something I can strongly relate to. I'm a MTG player as well and an optimizer by nature, so it's a very frustrating conundrum, especially when you and your community don't agree on what's OP (biiiiiig difference between Imperial Soup and a SM army that's just optimized within the confines of that one army). At least my community likes the "sexy" factor of Forgeworld, so ironically my Leviathan is welcomed with open arms. The Leviathan of all things XD.
As a general rule I at least like to see things primed in their main color--and 3 colors is nice since three paints really isn't all that expensive. As a New Englander in winter I'll generally hit things off with a pass then because priming in the winter can be awkward, and as someone that dislikes brush priming, I don't expect someone else to. But as a rule, I agree that presentation is important.
I'm a casual wargamer. 40k has been probably the miniatures game where I've encountered the most "that guy" situations. Guy Fielding a drop pod list in 5 using paint cans? Check. Despite using spray cans for drop pods, his army was unpainted. I've had players complain about wargear, complain about models that were converted, try and cheat, quit when a scenario wasn't in their favor, last game of 40k I played, I was berated for rolling the wrong number of dice(I was rolling for Deffgunz) after that, I quit.
One rule I like to follow is if you are going competitive against a new person/narrative player help them out. If they forget to move/shoot/charge a model tell them. If they made a tactically poor choice let them know and tell them why.
While I have no problem with people giving me advice and telling me I've made a poor choice, other people will take offence to that and see you as arrogant.
I don't think you have to be suave or anything... You just have to be polite and it usually helps if you ask first. "Hey, since you're still learning, would you like some advice?" Let them decide if they want it or not. When you're done, simply ask them how things went, if they enjoyed it, and what they thought they did right and what they could have done better. Then ask if they want your take if they haven't already. Being polite and asking goes a long way. Also giving the other person a choice helps a lot too. "You could move this unit here and get some cover, or you could do this" if they are receptive to your prompts.
I would say giving tactical advice during a match is a no go for most people. Let me learn those types of things on my own. Forgetting to do something is another matter. If I forget to do something on a turn that I'm supposed to do, let me know. A non 40k example. I work with kids. The other day I was playing Risk with 3 of the guys. On one turn, one of them forgot to count up for reinforcements. I think it's perfectly fine to let someone know they missed something in that case. But telling him where to attack or how many attacks to make is no good.
Here's an example of a "WAAC" player I've faced. And while yes, I know this was in a tournament setting, this particular case goes above and beyond. I'm playing my "boyz in trukks" Ork Speed Freaks. My opponent was playing Dark Eldar just after their new codex was released. I assault his Raider with my Burnaz. Or really, I _try_ to assault his Raider with my Burnaz, but because he equipped every one of his skimmers with a small flying stand base I'm unable to make base contact. So, I assumed we'd use the "no base = hull is base" rule since there's no physical way to put my models in base contact with his Raider. But no. He decides to rules laywer me and claim that because I can't reach the flying stand, the charge auto-fails. And when I bring up the fact that he's not using the stock base, he claims that because it's a "flying stand" and not an actual base, it's completely fine. Did I call this guy a WAAC player? My mistake. The correct term is _MUNCHKIN._
@@curtisbrown547 To be fair, the term "munchkin" can include cheaters, though not all cheaters are munchkins. Modelling for advantage is cheating. Modelling for advantage and then selectively rules-lawyering when called out on it to the point where he managed to convince the game store owner is being a Munchkin. Suffice to say I've since stopped playing at that store. And they also stopped holding tournaments or even carrying GW products. Seems like that one guy basically chased the 40k scene away.
Im also a beginner and my starting army is necrons. Yes. Not the best choice in 8th. I played against custodes, tzeentch horror spam, am tank list and death guard with 3 drones. I had only warriors, immortals, 2 hq, deathmarks and scarabs. They all knew that. I was close to quit the hobby. They also didnt paint their armies so i played against Grey and black primer chapter. Very frustrating
That's the one thing I've never really understood about the hardcore WAAC players: Why? I mean, I get being competitive, I get wanting to get validation and victory over an opponent. What I can't grasp is when these types start losing or pick obviously weaker players to play to boost their ego. I was lucky enough to have a wide array of guys to play back when I started in 5th but the shit I've seen: Store held a for fun no prize campaign where you picked a commander and that commander would get better over each victory and gain a point in any stat of choice. Our resident WAAC Nid player picked a Hive Tyrant and, in true Nid fashion, fed only on the easy-pickings crowd until he had a Toughness 10 Tyrant. For those who have not played the game or known about toughness values prior to the current edition, at Toughness 10, about 2/3rds of most armies couldn't even harm something like that. However, WAAC Nid player had a massive ego and boasted to the shop that he'd win the campaign and that he'd smoke anyone's commander and army to boot. The local Dark Eldar player took him up on that. Turn one, the Hive Tyrant was dead having choked on enough implosion missiles to kill a Biotitan. "Ah it didn't happen. it was a for fun match and didn't count." The owner caught wind of this and arranged a little something special for the Nid player and his Plot Armor Tyrant. He set up various battles for various resources and mumbo-jumbo which he faked just so he could force the Nid player to face the Dark Eldar player again (which the Dark Eldar player was cool with) and history repeated itself, this time in front of the owner. The Nid player would never change throughout all the years I've known him, eventually burning so many bridges and eventually being caught cheating so many times that the last time I faced him, he was playing Khorne Daemonkin and, knowing he was going to cheat, I planned accordingly with my orks: Very few slow units with mostly Gunwagon supports. He ended up killing around fifteen models before I managed to table him turn 3 and this was apparently the final nail in the coffin for the Daemon army, because he sold it shortly after the loss. Another delightful story is a short but nasty one: Had a new Tau player come into the store and another resident WAAC merciless mother fucker took him up on the offer to get a game in. It was the tau players first game. He had mostly infantry and two suits in total. The WAAC plays a Knight. Of the entire Tau force, only two units have the ability to even scratch the Knight which he kills turn 1. Never saw the tau player after that. I got pleanty of these as my area is rife with these assholes but those are some which just stood out.
The WAAC player plays a Knight. _A Knight._ In what I'm guessing was a 500 point game, since that's the cost of _a Knight._ I almost want to say that's GW's fault and not necessarily a WAAC player case. As a Tau player myself, my only option against that at 500 points is to follow suit and field a single Tiger Shark AX-1-0.
@@VestedUTuber It was around a 500-700 game with a player who picked up one of the older "Starter Set" boxes with the Kroot, Devil Fish, Single Suit and Stealth suits. If I'm not mistaken, he was heavily into infantry and bought more fire warriors and one of the mono-suit boxes from back in the day to have as another commander I think. Basically out of the list, two-three models, not units, models, could barely scratch the thing. It was...one of the Forgeworld knights if I'm not mistaken, the one with the Gamma-ray. He'd just finished getting the army [He had two FW and two Standards] them all painted. Anyway, he was one of the worst people to play as he was disgusting rules lawyer when it wasn't pertaining to him who dragged games to a screeching halt constantly. Awesome dude to shoot the shit with, never to play. As for the whole "Who to blame" thing, GW may have made the Knights one of 7th Ed's most loathed things to fight if you weren't a knight or had knife-ears, as that meant you were always sending in something to punch the shit out of it [I'm an ork player. I'd lose more models to the resulting explosion than the knights firing as the only means to topple them outside of running up and punching them were Tankbusta's, who could given a turn or two with protection] but this? He knew the player was new, he knew the guy had very few things that could hurt the Knights as he was a Tourney-player and he had an army of Vanilla marines he could have played the guy with. He chose to be a dick and to "Show off" his army. And I'm kind of there with you now, but as an ork player? The removal of pie-plates this edition along with orks BS LD rules of "Use model counts of unit or unit within x inches" always means im stampeding up the board and can now drag down Knights in a few turns while suffering pittances in response. Also, wouldn't a Stormsurge be decent against a knight? I know the current Melee variants of knights go for around 350ish. How many points is a SS walker currently?
@@Shinchibi A Stormsurge would be decent against a knight, but 1. I don't have one and 2. Stormsurges don't have Macro weapons. Tiger Shark AX-1-0s do, and Macro weapons shred through anything with the Titanic keyword. Additionally, the Tiger Shark is a flyer with the Airborne, Supersonic, Titan Hunter and Hard to Hit rules, which means they're going to have a hell of a time bringing it down and with its insane movement range I can basically put it anywhere on the board within one to two turns and unload a full barrage on those Knights. If I'm up against someone who's Munchkining Knights or other big walkers, I'm not interested in matching them unit for unit, I want to teach them a lesson. Anyway, a Stormsurge is 382pts without upgrades. Anyway, when I said I could fit a Tiger Shark AX-1-0 in a 500pts list I hadn't gotten the new datasheet yet. Turns out they now come out at a bit over, at 583 points. Still doable in 700pts, though.
You can get the same effect with two leman russ in a 500 pt game. Just don't make shit lists when you play against random neckbeards, or maybe just play with close friends?
I have just started Tyranids after hearing their lore and falling in love for them. I have only got a small pack of hormogaunts at the moment and only plan on keeping my entire army small-er for now. This is with the intention to fight small games and, if I win said fights, slowly start purchasing slightly more creatures of various sizes to somewhat emulate the growth of a tyranid swarm as the biomass from previous games is 'collected'. This is just for my own ammusment as their 'performance' in battle will dictate the hives growth. So yeah, I think I'm a casual fluff lover. Great video mate.
Always talk to whoever you are playing with and ask them how they want to play. Persoanlly i hate playing against that guy in my local store and nobody will play him. I do like the guidelines you put near the end to play casually. I think that stores should do more casual events and narrative events to allow people to play more.
There is a fine line between semi-comeptitive tho and casual. For example I can play a mono-black legion list, with no FW stuff and still be called "that guy" for using cultists instead of CSM because CSM are hot trash. I don't want to play people with no knowledge of the game and get salty for trying to optimize their favorite army.
DUDE I LOVE the video, keep up the good work, man i remember my first tournament i tried to playa narrative custode list, and i got demolished by knights, 60% of player brought knights, way back in July, honestly by the second day of the tournament i was to upset that i really could not play because I was an all melee army who usually got shot off by turn 2. I actually left the last match, however not before making sure my opponent had an opponent to play against since there was a no show at another table. My local community wondered where i diseapered to where honestly I could not take it, i went in with a little douse of hope that maybe my list would do well, only to have it extinguished by my first 3 matches, by the way the first match i played against the 2 place of that tournament, that dude was super try hard with his tau, the judge even came in saying that we should switch to proper opponents since my opponent had a history on newcommers, as in he was not lenient at all, however being as cocky as i was i said no it was fine, i would come to regret that as it was all downhill from there as he destroyed me. The other games were against knights and i did not bring stuff in my custodes to really deal with them. I really wish I had this video before then. To this day however that tournament has made me more competitive and i know what to expect at my next one, and fully plan on coming more prepared. Sadly this means i cannot use all custodes for my competitive list since the castellan and imperial guard are so much better game wise, but my custodes still remain my favorite army for casual play. I'm gonna show this video to my community since mine is a bit weird in that it has a mix but not where its half players do this half do that, but in where the regulars have both a casual and competitive side to them. This video would be great to show to some veterans of the hobby when playing with newcomers too since competitive can make some new people who are just getting in feel discouraged if all they fight against are top teir armies that squash them.
Great video! One habit I have adopted in competitive and casual games is to stop asking for "go backs." I would rather lose and learn from my mistake than have my opponent resent being nice and losing a game for it.
Yeah I do that too. I point out my own mistake, tell my opponent that you learn a lot from making mistakes and then continue playing. If they forget something and then ask if they can just do it now real quick, I usually let them do it. People like me who can handle owning up to their mistakes wont even ask that in the first place, so denying your opponent‘s request will pretty much guarantee them being upset...
@@Raubk0pierer Depending on the environment, I may hold my opponent to my standards, but more often than not I'll remind a player about something before they forget. I'd rather point out a mistake as it's being made (eg forgetting to shoot with a unit) rather than have them ask for a go back. And depending on the level of competition, watching an opponent make a mistake like that and denying a "go back" is a form of gotcha-bitch and that is a violation of the social contract.
@@DaddyOandSon Oh yeah, forgot to write that but I agree. Pointing out that something is being forgotten as it's happening is the right thing to do, as it is less disrupting for the game flow :)
It depends on the game for me. I'll give go backs in a casual game, but with the connotation that I may ask for one. If neither party wants to do go backs, so much the better. The one exception I make is for a misunderstanding of the rules--where someone clearly would have acted in a certain way if they understood the rule worked as such.
As a casual player/lore lover I invest alot of time painting and building an army that I like. As you said I just wanna roll dice and have fun, when I encounter a hyper competitive player I just tell them my goal. I don't really label them as "that guy" because they are trying to have fun on their level. but I do encounter people who try to tell me how to paint and how to play the game. Which pisses me off to no end, those types of people I label as "that guy"
I will subtly throw games for the narrative or fluff players in our meta. Forget the deep strikers till the last turn, assault my guys off of objectives to fail to score... and in one case assaulting his dead pile rather than targeting a unit on an objective. I've actually gotten quite good at losing or drawing games in a believable fashion. I would even say it's improved my play when tryharding. Intentionally playing badly is easier when you know what you're attempting to screw up, and tryharding is easier when you know which things will lose you the game.
Why would you do that? Just so that your opponent doesnt start to cry because they lost? Toning down lists is one thing, but purposefully throwing a game is something else entirely.
rpk 0714 sometimes, losing a game is part of the story you envision for your army... Some other time, in some campaign cases, winning by a certain margin would mean have a huge advantage for the following plays
@@Fayheurblode Reading this, my decision to only play matched games just got reinforced ;) The only situation where I wouldnt be having fun playing a game of 40k is when I find out my opponent is holding back or purposefully throwing the game. That is just disrespectful in my opinion.
You could really feel the soul you put into this video, and it's a good video indeed. I hope your local group sees this and gets a better understanding. As a casual player (and honestly at this point, more of a hobbyist then a player) this was enlightening. I'm usually the player who gets squashed, and after dedicating dozens of hours into research, assembly, painting and all that comes with the hobby, losing for 3 hours was hard. It seems silly in retrospect, but It's been a long time since I've played 40K. I may give it a go again. Thanks for helping me understand more!
I'm in a weird middle ground where I love the hobby, it calms me and it's the timesink I need after I quit MMOs, and I'm a good repository for lore on certain factions. But I'm also fiercely competitive to a fault and try to make my lists lore appropriate yet still do my best to equip the best gear and use the best possible units. It's hard to balance these two schools of thought, and it can be pretty stressful, I agonised over including Reivers in my Blood Angels force because they would have fit the play style of fast brutal blitzkrieg attacks but the new codex states how the Rievers are frowned upon within the Angels for being dishonorable and often overly cruel. In the end I decided against, but as I said it is very hard for me to balance my love of the lore amd hobby with my competitive impetuous spirit.
Same boat. I love Tau and their lore, but I'm competitive as a player. Thankfully, Tau lore allows for pretty much any army configuration that works, and their rules are consistently strong, so I've been able to have the best of both worlds. So much so that it pissed off my closest and most loyal of play partners, my brother, who ironically helped me brainstorm a lot of the lists that I put together. If two close brothers can get into arguments over competitive play in this game, what chance do strangers have?
I'm a very casual Fluff player. Necron is my army. My army is built around what a Necron legion would look like, not how it could win better against grey knights. With necrons being already beyond nerfed, You can guess how often I win. however it's the attitude of the opponants I had the luck to play against that makes me have fun even if I loose. Your video earned you another subscriber! you hit it right on the nail!
I mean, as someone just getting into the hobby, I'm probably more focused on the hobby side and 'fluffy' armies but that doesn't stop me from ensuring that if I hit a 2k list it won't get tabled by the second turn by the local competitive Death Guard player...
@@bobuscesar2534 The guy in question has like 3-4 different armies, Death Guard just stands out at the current pain in the butt to deal with because A: of the two six-shelf cabinets to allow people to hold armies at the shop three of the shelves are basically flooded with Nurgle by various people and B. During the short snit of time people were playing Killteam before giving up he's the guy that lugged Blight Launchers and so on into that game and was constantly tabling people in 2-3 rounds. Jokes on him, it was an objective game he was against with me, buuuut....
@@bobuscesar2534 they are about as comp as chaos gets thanks to their demon allies where they can be surprisingly mobile also death guard's ability to stack non psychic mortal wounds can be down right absurd on top of being generally a pain in the ass to hurt
I believe i am a mix of competitive and hobby player. Like i love blood angels and the imperium and wanna build like lore friendly lists but i am also down for being like oh that combo works good and these units are super solid, let's use those. I like to try to find a good middle ground with hobby and competition
You're more of an experimentalist player rather than competitive. A competitive player builds lists with the only goal of winning a game through the use of the most powerful units (and maybe combos) of the game. I play Tau, so I can give you some examples to clarify the subtle difference: The competitive player is the one who brings always three riptides at any given match. An experimentalist instead would notice that markerlights and cadre fire blades boost up a lot your infantry, so it would try out the combo of shooting the +2 BS markerlight with the fire blade and use the 1 CP stratagem transform that marker light in 1+D3 markers. The competitive player looks for an easy win, the experimentalist one wants fun while playing and ways to try out new things with his minis.
I have lost all but 2 of my battles, the tutorial, and when the enemy forfeited after I placed down 1 flamer, just 1, not even finished placing down the whole unit.
What if you're running a fluffy army and still win all the time? For example, currently I'm playing a Tau list in which I cram in as many battlesuits as possible (since I love giant robots so much) but with one condition: no duplicates except for maybe a squad of 3 crisis suits since that seems to be how they operate fluff wise. And with this I still win 90% of the time. Am I being a try-hard for maximizing the potential of my units and taking advantage of stratagems? I never like the idea of intentionally underperforming since it seems disrespecting to my opponents.
*Casual player here!* Great video! I can really relate to this. I used to play x wing before 2.0 came out, and I played Empire. My friends that got me into the game we’re hyper competitive but never really got involved with tournaments for unknown to me reasons. I on the other hand am a casual player who was just looking to have fun, and would bring lists that were close to things you would expect from the movie and narrative rather than tournament style lists. Of course they only played competitive lists, and my friend who flew Scum pretty much refused to change his list once he found what was crushing the competitive scene. After being crushed week after week, the game was no longer fun for me as they were my only friends that I knew that played. I pretty much stopped playing after a few months of that, and once 2.0 came out I gave up completely because Fantasy Flight wants waaaaay too much money to keep me playing in 2.0 It’s sad, I miss playing the game, and I know my friends would still play if I asked, but I also know that same Scum list will be the only thing he will ever fly, so I don’t even want to bother with it, and will probably end up selling my entire fleet. I got them into 40k and I’m starting to see the same behavior happening here, which has caused me to branch out and play at stores more. Moral of the story is I should have figured sooner during the x wing days that things wouldn’t change with my friends being super competitive, and now that I know that I can try to better prep myself in my 40k games against them (usually still lose though as I find competitive lists for chaos too boring to play) but I still have a slightly better chance than I did before (mostly thanks to this Chanel!), and now I’m building a community of new casual friends to play with that share my love of the fluff. I hope super competitive people watch this video and try to tone it down with their non-competitive friends, and that more casual players can identify these competitive players sooner so they can know what to expect.
BassGuyEJ Well sounds like your buddy is the prime example of why Brady decided to make this video in the first place. A non-tournament player who exclusively plays OP netlists... Sounds like he is incapable of taking responsibility for his own mistakes, so he tries to avoid having to deal with that by playing lists that have a very good chance of winning the game with or without him as a player. Sad. You did well to try to find some non-toxic folks to play with, but bear in mind that with people like your friend there it‘s not a problem of competitive players that ruin the fun for casual players. It‘s the problem of mentally weak persons who might throw themselves in front of a bus if they lose a game and would have to reflect on their mistakes/shortcomings and put in some work for (personal) growth.
Dude there are loads of fun ways to play chaos competitively. I play tzeentch and nurgle and love them both. I would suggest mixing daemons from one god with the relevant 40k faction and you'll be good. Death guard and Nurgle is great and Thousand sons and Tzeentch is also great! Many ways to build too depending on which side you lean into more the daemons or the other one.
@@Paintopia_VR For sure! I never said that chaos can't be played competitively, I just personally don't find current competitive chaos lists fun. I play Iron Warriors, and like to play a siege-type gun line with a mostly sit back and shoot style, which chaos is ok at, but there are other armies that are far better at it IMO. I'm currently building a daemons army as well, but it will be a Khorne daemons army, where as when I play my Iron Bois I tend to go mark of Slaanesh for EC during the shooting phase.
@@BassGuyEJ if your looking for a gunline in chaos then your doing it wrong they do not do that. You want ad mech or guard for your gunline, deamons are a more melee focus amry with shooting support. I personally am glad they are not a gunline as that is the most boring way to play the game imo. You have basically narrowed the game down to deployment and target priority which is pretty non interactive. Melee is much more tactical and enjoyable to play when you learn how but no it is not easy like the gun line option. Fun for me is strategic and tactical depth with cool models which daemons have.
Wandering Turtle meh, to each their own. I personally don’t feel that there’s a ‘wrong” way to play 40k when you play casually. I like recreating what I see from the novels from the IVth legion when I play, which is relentless gunfire. I have melee too, I never put all my eggs in one basket, but again to each their own
The main reason I got out of MtG and into WH40k is because of 'that guy'. At an as CASUAL marketed event we got a draw because we then ran out of time in the 3rd round. I wasn't really experienced at that time so I wasn't the fastest player of course. He used this to guilt trip me into giving him the win. I never really cared about winning and I only had a budget deck that wasn't great that I had much fun playing with though. But this mentality put me so off that I just walked away from the hobby. One of the first things the clerk told me at my local GW is that when people would bring a really good competetive army list they would announce it first and ask if it was ok so they could test it without their oponnent feeling bad for getting wrecked.
I dunno. The problem is that the big models are really nice and imposing. You definitely can't say that no narrative player could ever fall in love with their bane blade, considering the time it takes just to model the thing. That said, if it's grey and caked with super glue from being remodelled for every edition when the optimal loadout changes... ehhh... Then you're that guy.
At Granite City Waaghfest, we only have a custom etched "best general" mug each year. All the real prize support is just raffled as door prizes. It works for us
Eloquently put. While I personally enjoy 40k for the modeling and story (the Ultramarines novels are actually what got me into it), I totally understand the fact that this is still a contest of some form and some people get more competitive about it. I'm glad you raised the point that competition has it's place, as does enjoyment of just a big table of brightly colored space knights and chittering bugs.
Check this out dude, I am highly impressed with not just your honesty and your willingness to use your own experiential knowledge to help others inprove or avoid but with the way in which you deliver this information. The anecdotal or, personal experience method of teaching is becoming a more accepted way of education even in a professionally slothful field such as I occupy (Substance Abuse/Social Services). You are a very articulate and self aware person. . . And BTW, I have been talked to with far less respect than I am personally comfortable with by other WAACs at social tournaments because I kitbash THE FUCK out of my Space Wolves. I know that a lot of people KB but I found it downright annoying that a Lore Nazi would make an issue out of it at a group get together. He quickly found out that only one of us in that exchange was. ot going to get the results he was looking for......🥋 Anyway, you are a good example to look at. Peace
He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster. And if you gaze long into an abyss, the abyss also gazes into you
I am a hobby > game hobbyist, but my friend kinda isn't. He doesn't really netlist or goes out to tournaments but he collects models to play and to win. We have a playfield at my home on which we almost weekly play. The only time I defeated him was when I set up a scenario in which he had to change his strategie to being passive and setting up ambushes. He only needed to hide, but instead he still rushed ahead and got crushed after which he blamed the mode for being unfair even though he could have won if he tried. He also never surrenders so games go on till someone wins and the other loses.
A better "house rule" for your softer tournaments, or perhaps even for the game as a whole, is to disallow cross-detachment use of CP. This way, the CP generated/refunded from a Guard detachment, can only be used by the Guard detachment, instead of being funnelled into a Castellan, Slamguinius, etc. Some multi-faction armies are "fluffy", but also break the game because they allow repetitive use of strategems that seem to have been intended for very limited use.
Another option is to spot points. This allows you to bring your competive army, Be challenged, learn to play your army competitively, and still give the other guy a decent chance to win. I used to spot 250pts in a 2000pt list and not even tell the other player I did this. IE I would take 1750pts worth of competitive list to a 2000pt game.
I’ve always been a hobby first/ collector for fluffs sake hobbies. But I enjoy the channel for meta and lore analysis based off of news and changes in the community. I hope to eventually play my armies if I can focus my hobby work, but it may take some more list building and optimisation if I cared about winning. For now I like my armies for their looks/ aesthetics and fluff.
Our group set up a tier system where people can self evaluate or peer evaluate each other's lists and give it a competitive rating. That way, we're more likely to get more evenly matched games. It's totally subjective, but it's helped ease people into expectations of what they'll be running against. Our current narrative campaign is flexible where people can run whatever style they want, but they'll get bonus campaign points if the game ends up being close within 3VP.
I play in a mix of WAAC (by WAAC, I'm the guy who likes to bring in those really good units to win and destroy and kill) and heavy casual, like I won't really do tournaments, but I still love to also table my opponents, like I've done to many Space Wolves. Also had a very fun War of Attrition against a Imperial Guard, and my army is an Aeldari under Ulthwe rules (yet I forget to use their FNP rule from time to time, plus it saves me points on my WS and HW since now I don't need to give them Spirit Stones, since it's the same FNP rule that Ulthwe does)
Don't know if you'll see this comment, but; thank you for making this video. Said everything I would want to and it's great that it is said by someone who has dome competitive and narrative Well done lad
At a local club near me, they had an army composition category with a "fluff" score which was about 30% of the entire scoring rubric. If you had a super optimized competitive army, you would score lower on this, but may score higher on the mission wins (which was 50%) and vice versa. It was an interesting approach to try and get casual players to get along with competitive players in the tournament. Forgot to mention: Said club had a majority of fluff players.
My local tournament did this once as well. I personally don't like this because who gets to decide what is fluffy? If I bring a pure iron warriors lists that includes Cultists and daemon princes I might think that's fluffy, but maybe my opponent doesn't. Or what if I bring Guilliman and primaris marines because its fluffy but my opponent thinks that primaris go against the original fluff so therefor its not fluffy? I think that's not really a good way to handle it since it could be used to attack certain players just because you don't like their army, because it could very well be fluffy but it doesn't agree with your interpretation of the fluff.
Great topic! One thing I think you missed about the comparison with video games or TCGs is the time to actually play the game. A common refrain in competitive video gaming is just "play more". Telling someone to sit down every single night and make sure they play at least 5 games. Cool, that probably takes a few hours, done in the comfort of your own home and requires no travel for a single person. Good luck getting a single game of 40k a day, most people seriously struggle to get one game a week. This gets to my advice for how to be competitive, treat every non-tournament game as a chance to improve, you want to learn something that improves your game. Competitive is typically defined as "winning", when I think it should be "learning". Being competitive to me is about getting better, which leads to winning, rather than having the goal of winning. Having this means I get to play "competitively" all the time, even against a newbie, well that's an awesome chance for me to learn how to use this unit I've avoided using before now, or even learning his army by helping him learning his list and suggesting strategy that would beat me.
I have a story about my recent experience at a tournament. I went 1-4 which is fine, I took a casual country boy list to a tournament in a big city and got treated exactly as you'd expect. Learnt a fuckload though, made some new friends, had a great time. Anyway, on game 4 (two day tournament) I hear a lot of hustle and bustle on the main table. I'm busy getting my ass handed to me, but I can hear them getting quite heated, and one of the TOs gets the small crowd forming nearby to back off - clearly an important thing is going on. So afterwards, I go and ask who they are and what was going on, and the answer I got was "As diplomatically as possible, just two guys playing way too hard especially given that neither of them are in contention for the prize." And that really kinda made me feel better about the whole thing, and I went into my next game thinking "Fuck it, let's just try to have some fun" and I did, it was the greatest game I had. I got thoroughly flogged because I decided to throw out the plan that wasn't working - and use a plan that was even worse - but it was great anyways.
I have only been playing 40k since 2018 & have learnt a lot from you. Esp with watching your Tabletop video! One thing I have noticed in almost ever game I play... Terrain rules... Do people ever use them?
IMHO the proper approach is to remember that 40k is not a sport, and treating it as one is missing the entire point of the game. A good competitive player knows when to bring their LVO list and when to bring a non-100% optimized list to casual night. You become "That Guy" when you turn up to 40k night at your FLGS with a killer tournament list without prior notice and end up facing and crushing someone who showed up with a casual list for fun games. You become "That Guy" when you slam anything other than Matched Play (and competitive play in particular) as being wrong or laugh at people who want to use Power Levels or a fun narrative scenario instead of the bland (IMHO) ITC missions. The sad truth is that people who have the competitive approach and try to force it on the community one of two things happen: Either the community embraces it and anything other than cutthroat competitive play dies, and never shows up again, or you experience what happened to you and the competitive player gets shunned. It's typically binary. There is a big reason why Army Composition and Sportsmanship were part of the scoring (and still are in the official GTs in the form of "Favorite Army"); to prevent people from shitting on the background of the game to focus on winning. It might be a "valid" approach to the game, but it's also one that I'm old enough to remember GW themselves pointing out it was pretty much missing the point of the game (I started playing in 1996!).
The important is to talk with your opponent on your upcomming game, if tge guy says: bring it on i want to be challenged or tonight i just want to try differents units, just listen to them and have a good time
I like to challenge myself by winning with my fluff armies. I’ve won many competitive games and didn’t find it fun Slaughtering my opponents. When they spent hours getting the paint just right on a unit just to have that unit removed off the table without doing a single thing.....yeah that sucks. First and foremost it is a game. I play to have fun, when it is time to crank it up to win then i do so. Good vid, you touched base on points I agree with.
thanks man I was a casual player then I bought Death Gard ( first army is Necron) I keep 2 army one casual and one competetive so this way I can enjoy both world
I had that experience when trying to branch out into Warmachine in like 2016/2017. The local scene where I live is nothing BUT try-hards, spam-lists and min-maxing lists. I'm a filthy casual who loves to paint, lore etc. so I perceived the overall atmosphere as very cold and unfriendly among the other players. Never touched the minies again which is a shame because I do like the overall lore and feel of the Privateer Press games.
So long as you keep the cheese where it belongs, play as you will. If you bring a tournament list to your local store to smash the fluff players in order to please your ego I would encourage you to leave this hobby and find something else that's soothes your ego. Toxic and WAAC players don't belong here in this hobby
I am ok with tournament lists in fluff/casual games as long as my opponent informs me about it and has a valid reason (eg. has tournament in a couple of days and wants to try out some stuff).
The problem I have with that sort of thing is that competitive and WAAC is really subjective. Pre CA, I was playing a list with Azrael Blob--mono list, no soup or anything. In comp....DA is what--tier 3 at best at the time? But something like THAT made me the black sheep for a good long while, and that frustrated me a lot, because not only is plasma heavy DA lore friendly, but against good armies like Dark Eldar, Knights, Guard, etc, that was basically the only way to really have a chance because DA was so limited, and SM grossly underpowered. So it really sucks to be punished for optimizing the army you like, because the army you like was sorta bad at the time.
Great story. I'm one of the lucky ones that doesn't mind playing and most likely losing against *that guy* .. so long as they are willing to help give me technical pointers to help learn the new edition.
It kind of sucks because I have a "that guy" friend with Warmachine/Hordes; I played a new army against him and he almost never gave me a minute to read what my guys even do. Had zero fun and was over it after turn 2.
I built a list to stop a "that guy" at an escalation league we're doing. That guy showed up...only he was me. Tank commander, basilisk, and hellhound at 50p pts is a bit tough for people to eliminate
iam coming from the mtg competitive community and your video came right on time! i had some trouble in the past in the same way in w40k you describe because iam the comp. and a friend of mine its a casual player.
Long ago when neccrons first came out, I joined 40k. I made a necron army and spent a long time painting and even converting some of my models. I finally got the nerve to play a game at a shop. Played against "that guy" blood Angels list and was phased out by turn 2. It was so demoralizing, and his attitude was so toxic, I quit after that night and put up my painted army on Ebay. I have recently just came back and have a similar mentality that you explain in this video. I know I'll never truly be competitive as I just don't have the time required for practice, and I enjoy the hobby portion more, but I try to give the competitive player the benefit of the doubt and try to build a list that gives them a bit of challenge even though I know its probably a losing battle. It's also why I play the "bad guy" armys so that in my mind, the bad guy loses in my narrative, but we always come back for more.
What do I do when the units I like are perceived to be overpowered? I run a salamanders list that has 2 leviathan dreadnoughts 2 rapier carriers and a deredeo in a 2 battalion pure space marine list. With a chapter master a lieutenant and 2 techmarines. The rest of the points has scouts and 2 devastator squads kitted out for mortal wounds, and a primaris ancient. I feel that I’m perceived to be that guy because even when games are close my opponents do not like playing against me.
Maybe just bring those things once in awhile, or let your opponents know ahead of time what you are bringing so they can tailor their list for it. It might not seem fair to you but at least everyone will enjoy the game more that way, and it won't feel like a "gotcha" moment when they see your army.
IMO the ancient are basically boneless version of the dreaded ynnari soulburst that have garnered quite an infamous reputation at my FLGS at the end of 7th ed, it just not fun when your turn get interrupted by ancient banner or soul burst and having to pick up your dead model on your own turn. your list seem solid and competitive but I don't feel it is overpowered at all unlike the current loyal32+slam captain+imperial knight meta
Almost Pro Gaming Well the thing is I don’t have much in the way of other models to work with. And my opponents know this. It feels that if I want to play at the store I like I either need to buy a new army entirely, something that is economically infeasible on top of being a real feelsbad experience when you drop 1k in a month to build an army that looks cool and is something you enjoy playing with. Or I have to move to another store.
We play in a small city 3man group, 1 hour from a city with up to 20 players and we often try to stick to rules to be better at the Game and show them who's BOSS when we go to tournaments there. One guy in my group is competitive/hobbiest and the other is full hobby/play for fun; and i always try to play acordingly. I'm full on ForFun i play wacky list, and try the suboptimal hivefleets but i know that i have to bring the not so cr*ppy ones when i face competitive guy, i think we both have fun in the clutch wins or losses and we always try to analyse what we could have done better
I agree with your advice, but I think the onus is also on the other people too. Instead of ghosting you, for instance, if you had asked me for a game and I know you're going tryhard, that's what I'd say. "Hey man, you seem to be really into the competitive scene, which is cool, but not my thing." If you came back with "Oh, good point, let me build a fluffy list and just have some fun if you're cool to play that way?" I'd at least give you a chance. If you're good on your word, even if you win, then I'm good to play you again. But if you just went tryhard a again, then you're done. My point being, this is good advice for people like you. But the fluffy players (which I am one) also need to be more vocal about that kind of thing. One of my main playing partners is a guy who likes competitive, but we always show sportsmanship, let some things slide, and he tends to use newer lists that he hasn't tested much or otherwise isn't the top-tier thing that he's going for when he plays against me. At least now. At first he was hyper competitive and I told him basically that. Something along the lines "I don't think either of us are gonna have fun cause I'm bringing fluffy and you're competitive so if it's just a stomp you'll be bored and I'll be frustrated and neither of us will enjoy it." Put it like that, like I said, he tends to try new stuff or weird combos or even just more fluffy in general lists when we play now.
Very even handed take Mr B, I think with 40k some pre-game negotiations are pretty much required, on my local gaming FB pages folks usually qualify the type of match they looking for to avoid or at least minimise mismatches, heck even me with my Play to Win tendencies has a Eldar list featuring all my old metal mini's consisting of many many banshees, scorpions and tiny Mk1 Avatar as opposed to Crazy Cat lady and her Shining chums list
Recently started painting my first models ( Cadian Guardsmens 180) I’ll honestly just be playing to have fun rather than just trying to win. More there so just show off my endless amounts of Guardsmen ;)
This is remarkably true. I have a friend that always tries his best to have the most efficient army. And as much as i appreciate the guy, i don't want to play him anymore, even tho i play imperial guard who's considered a top tier faction. He doesn't seem to understand that what i appreciate about the game is the aestetic of it, and building my army according to "what looks cool to me"and not what's strong. To make the matter worst, i often play massiv ammounts of infantry, and the few last game i played were all about spending 1 hour placing the terrains and more than a hundreds miniatures to get stomped by unpainted eldars in a few turns whith very little to no hope to achieve any kind of minor victory whithout outrageous luck on my side. I realized how much of a difference the mindset of the players had on the experience. To others, i AM that guy because infantry IG can still kick some serious ass and i take ages to get my army ready, which is annoying, so i try to relativise it. But i'd still call games whith that friend "bad experiences" regardless. I found out that asking your opponent prior: "Cool game or tryhard mod ?" is kind of a good way to avoid that, as even tho it might not be possible for everyone, you're both gonna be aware of the type of game you're going to play and can plan your list accordingly or decline the game if you really don't want to.
I always feel odd in the current state of the game. Im an Imperial knight player. But I dont take an imperial mixed army. All I field are imperial knights because I love the fluff and lore of house Terryn. I typically take 2 questoris knights and 6-7 armigers in a 2k game. I enjoy the army a ton, but some people have assumed I powergame because most people at my store think its cheesy and spam to field nothing but knights. I don't see it as spam, just as playing another army. I usually joke back at them by saying "Well I play imperial knights, thats like saying a space marine player is spamming tactical squads." But I sometimes either end up throwing the game to their favor, or asking if they're still having fun. Buuuut everyone wants me on their team for our apoc games when im fielding a whole knight house of 13 questoris knights and 11 armigers.
@@angryskeletonpope2334 most of it ive gotten half off from stores selling preowned knights or older sprues. I make enough to get a knight every now and then if I want a painting project
I've got a friend who is stupid competitive to the point where just about everyone at our local shop loves it when he loses and will encourage other people to crush him. But lately he could bring a 10 man squad from his army and players would still turn him down even if they were allowed to use something like an Imperial Knight against those models. The sad part is he knows he's turned into "That Guy" and wants to try to undo the damage but he's made players so salty and angry that they don't trust him anymore.
If he would like to gain back the trust of those people, he can try this: Go to each person individually that has a problem with him and say something like "Hey XXXX, I wanted to talk to you because I wanted to say sorry for making some of our past games not very enjoyable. I realize now that I can get out of hand when it comes to playing competitively and most of the time I try too hard to win which I now realize isn't in the right spirit of the game. So again, I just wanted to say sorry and I understand why you don't enjoy playing with me, but I just wanted you to know that if you're ever willing to change your mind I will try my best to make sure the game is enjoyable for both of us."
I was very lucky, I was always a narrative player and had been since 1999, after years and years of getting trashed, I made a narrative list that was able to hold it's own against competitive players, after a crazy win streak for a couple of years I stopped playing, now I have recently come back to the hobby, and have started night lords because I love the lore on them and the style,
The problem that I have with the hobby is that even while playing casual or semi competitive there are just too much ''balance'' issues. You could go ''very competitive'' with a space marine list while your opponent goes with a ''semi competitive'' Tau list and he still blasts you off the board with relative ease. Or in another case, I made a fluffy green tide list with Orks and my opponent went with a competitive ad mech list and I absolutely stomped my opponent into the ground... It is quite hard to judge what is competitive and semi competitive in a lot of situations. When playing with friends I hate the fact that most games are just done by turn 3 and one of the 2 is almost annihilated. I cant remember a game that lasted till turn 4 or when I had a close game. The scale just tips over to one side real fast and that takes the fun out of it for me.. And then I become the ''other'' guy and start cussing or getting bored/frustrated... I myself like to play what I love but also with the win in mind. I don't mind losing at all, that is just a part of this game. But the balance between dexes make it too hard to enjoy the game sometimes. Some people suggested narrative or open play but I absolutely despise those game modes.
Reason why i haven't gotten into tabletop WH40K: I see it as a game first and a hobby second, BUT I'm also not the type of person to play-to-win; instead, I want to play all the armies, try all the strategies and combinations, and play a lot of games against a variety of armies that my friends also play. The problem with this: it's too expensive to try out an army. Outside of borrowing someone else's units, your only option is to attempt to proxy units. Even then, proxies works mostly if you just want to try a different unit/equipment; NOT for proxying an entire army. I own 1000s of MTG cards, not counting lands, many of which i got for the price between $0.01 and $0.30 ( with at least 4000 running closer to the $0.01 mark). I only need about 40 cards to make a deck so i have a huge number of options for my decks and i can keep a dozen decent decks on hand at any given time.
I'd consider buying the codex for each army i wanted to try, that's a fine price point. But I don't want to buy, assemble, and ( ultimately poorly) paint the pieces. I also don't want someone else to paint them because i would feel like the army was less "mine". Personally i think 40k should move to video game(s). They wouldn't lose the hobbyists( reportedly the highest part of their consumer base) from their miniatures market. They could balance the game without codex reprints. The games would go MUCH faster and require less memorization of the rules for players. Calculations and rolls could be made instantly. Not to mention that it's probably the only way to get a player like me. I wouldn't mind paying $120 (maybe a bit more) for the access to every army and every unit in any quantity and the ability to customize color freely.
Never thought about it like this before. I always played to win but i never played out of character for my army if that makes sense? No needless deaths for my tau as an example
What people are currently angry about is that we went from the awsome modular 8th and 9th that was customisable for narative and Competitive folks to 10th which is geard completely geared towards Little Timmy and the WAAC Powergamer Dudebro crowd. I have several Armies that literally couldn't be translated over because the whole killing off uber factions thing. Nomote Imperial Crusade Armies.
Personally I am a player who looks at Warhammer as Hobby=Game. I care about making an army that doesn't just spam out the best units endlessly but i also want something that can in most circumstances still win against a foe who does the same or has a weaker competitive army. I don't play competitive yet but I do get a lot of enjoyment from just optimizing things to a certain point. I won't spam just the best units but I also won't make a completely suboptimal army that has no chance of winning but is the most lore friendly army I can build. Also great advice regarding new tournament players. I might become one of those and I can indeed say that it would not be a fun experience if I was just tabled in such a way that it feels like there was just nothing I could do to stop whoever my opponent was. I find that close games are the most fun to play and those where you know you have already won are the least.
BEst thing you can do is ask your opponent wether he prefers flavy or turnament list. The second thing you should NEVER do as a competetive player is when you are facing someone who is completly new to the hobby...wiping the board with him like broom... what i do if i face a new player who is really new is explaining to him why i do specific moves.... also i do ask him from time to time if i can give him honest hints what moves are good if he wants to if not i will ask him after his move if i can give him advice what he shouldve done instead. this initiateds a learning process that will lead to a deeper understanding of the game for the newer player. Also not to make the most optimal move every time is also maybe a good option scince the biggest price you can win is a new player for the hobby.
I dont want to become compatative player but i wanna beat my friend who plays nids/genestlealer cult but as tau its hard even if i do better every new try i fail and he has like 500 piont below me and still i cant win what should i do? Then? How do tau win against nids?
Tau should be able to hold their own against those armies if you have the right build and deploy/play your army efficiently to make the best use of your Montka and Kouyan and For The Greater good. So I assume it might just be that you need some list building and Tau tactics help, which I can give you through my coaching services that I offer through Patreon if you're interested.
If games Workshop commissioned a video game studio to create a Starcraft 2-quality Warhammer 40k RTS, I and I'm sure many others would happily pay a subscription fee of up to $30-$40 a month just to play the game.
Jokes on you, I avoid becoming That Guy by losing all my games.
Unintentionally.
Jokes on you I play necrons
I feel ya there buddy. Losers ftw. I think? XD
played my first game today and I ended up in a TIE lol
Same
I guess Im randomly asking but does any of you know a way to get back into an instagram account??
I was dumb lost the account password. I would love any tips you can offer me.
YOU'VE BECOME THE VERY THING YOU SWORE TO DESTROY
"You either die a hero, or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain." lol
@@AlmostProGaming in all seriousness i've had the same experience with competitive people and i ( very recently) learned to be more relaxed in some games :) i feel you thanks for the awesome video as always ^^
@@FilosofoDaCamera Yeah this story is something I can strongly relate to. I'm a MTG player as well and an optimizer by nature, so it's a very frustrating conundrum, especially when you and your community don't agree on what's OP (biiiiiig difference between Imperial Soup and a SM army that's just optimized within the confines of that one army).
At least my community likes the "sexy" factor of Forgeworld, so ironically my Leviathan is welcomed with open arms. The Leviathan of all things XD.
"You were the chosen one!"
“It’s over, filthy tryhard, I have the high ground now!”
40k has a crazy community where hobbyist can talk about gameplay/lore/paints/models/terrains for days and will still have more stuff to talk about.
As a casual player I'd like to see at least painted armys. I don't really want to play a game with the army of gray plastics.
Very much this. Nothing wrong for a more casual attire sorta thing but if it's a tourney, see if you can at least get 3 or so shades on there!
But I play grey knights...
Some people may not have the budget to buy paints along with the army itself. But, like, I still think it's worth doing.
@@spudward1801 If they just started the game, or just got that unit and can't wait to play a game, I can understand.
As a general rule I at least like to see things primed in their main color--and 3 colors is nice since three paints really isn't all that expensive. As a New Englander in winter I'll generally hit things off with a pass then because priming in the winter can be awkward, and as someone that dislikes brush priming, I don't expect someone else to.
But as a rule, I agree that presentation is important.
I'm a casual wargamer.
40k has been probably the miniatures game where I've encountered the most "that guy" situations.
Guy Fielding a drop pod list in 5 using paint cans? Check. Despite using spray cans for drop pods, his army was unpainted.
I've had players complain about wargear, complain about models that were converted, try and cheat, quit when a scenario wasn't in their favor, last game of 40k I played, I was berated for rolling the wrong number of dice(I was rolling for Deffgunz) after that, I quit.
Is this a local shop? this would not be allowed at a GW store. Good local shop>GW store>Bad local shop
One rule I like to follow is if you are going competitive against a new person/narrative player help them out. If they forget to move/shoot/charge a model tell them. If they made a tactically poor choice let them know and tell them why.
While I have no problem with people giving me advice and telling me I've made a poor choice, other people will take offence to that and see you as arrogant.
My dude that's an easy way to get a scoop win and some choice word thrown in your direction namely fuck off my Army my moves my choices
Totally agree. I generally try to point out stratagems that might help them at the time too...assuming I know the army well enough to do so XD
I don't think you have to be suave or anything... You just have to be polite and it usually helps if you ask first.
"Hey, since you're still learning, would you like some advice?" Let them decide if they want it or not. When you're done, simply ask them how things went, if they enjoyed it, and what they thought they did right and what they could have done better. Then ask if they want your take if they haven't already.
Being polite and asking goes a long way.
Also giving the other person a choice helps a lot too. "You could move this unit here and get some cover, or you could do this" if they are receptive to your prompts.
I would say giving tactical advice during a match is a no go for most people. Let me learn those types of things on my own. Forgetting to do something is another matter. If I forget to do something on a turn that I'm supposed to do, let me know. A non 40k example. I work with kids. The other day I was playing Risk with 3 of the guys. On one turn, one of them forgot to count up for reinforcements. I think it's perfectly fine to let someone know they missed something in that case. But telling him where to attack or how many attacks to make is no good.
Here's an example of a "WAAC" player I've faced. And while yes, I know this was in a tournament setting, this particular case goes above and beyond.
I'm playing my "boyz in trukks" Ork Speed Freaks. My opponent was playing Dark Eldar just after their new codex was released.
I assault his Raider with my Burnaz. Or really, I _try_ to assault his Raider with my Burnaz, but because he equipped every one of his skimmers with a small flying stand base I'm unable to make base contact. So, I assumed we'd use the "no base = hull is base" rule since there's no physical way to put my models in base contact with his Raider. But no. He decides to rules laywer me and claim that because I can't reach the flying stand, the charge auto-fails. And when I bring up the fact that he's not using the stock base, he claims that because it's a "flying stand" and not an actual base, it's completely fine.
Did I call this guy a WAAC player? My mistake. The correct term is _MUNCHKIN._
That's modelling for advantage. That s not WAAC, it's cheating
@@poorimage3158
That plus the fact that he was rules lawyering (but only when it favored him) pretty much puts him in Munchkin territory.
the correct term is actually cheater. modeling for advantage is strictly forbidden. I would have put my army away and left if he did that
@@curtisbrown547
To be fair, the term "munchkin" can include cheaters, though not all cheaters are munchkins. Modelling for advantage is cheating. Modelling for advantage and then selectively rules-lawyering when called out on it to the point where he managed to convince the game store owner is being a Munchkin.
Suffice to say I've since stopped playing at that store. And they also stopped holding tournaments or even carrying GW products. Seems like that one guy basically chased the 40k scene away.
I'm new to this but I would have picked my models up told him why...
Wow... it is inspiring to hear such honesty. Thank you for sharing this perspective.
So you’re saying that you started out completely clean shaven and ended up with a thick neckbeard?
Im also a beginner and my starting army is necrons. Yes. Not the best choice in 8th.
I played against custodes, tzeentch horror spam, am tank list and death guard with 3 drones.
I had only warriors, immortals, 2 hq, deathmarks and scarabs. They all knew that.
I was close to quit the hobby. They also didnt paint their armies so i played against Grey and black primer chapter.
Very frustrating
@@Alino- I hate to break it to you, but the Night Lords aren't space marines anymore. You're about 10,000 years late on that o
That's the one thing I've never really understood about the hardcore WAAC players: Why?
I mean, I get being competitive, I get wanting to get validation and victory over an opponent. What I can't grasp is when these types start losing or pick obviously weaker players to play to boost their ego.
I was lucky enough to have a wide array of guys to play back when I started in 5th but the shit I've seen:
Store held a for fun no prize campaign where you picked a commander and that commander would get better over each victory and gain a point in any stat of choice. Our resident WAAC Nid player picked a Hive Tyrant and, in true Nid fashion, fed only on the easy-pickings crowd until he had a Toughness 10 Tyrant. For those who have not played the game or known about toughness values prior to the current edition, at Toughness 10, about 2/3rds of most armies couldn't even harm something like that. However, WAAC Nid player had a massive ego and boasted to the shop that he'd win the campaign and that he'd smoke anyone's commander and army to boot. The local Dark Eldar player took him up on that. Turn one, the Hive Tyrant was dead having choked on enough implosion missiles to kill a Biotitan.
"Ah it didn't happen. it was a for fun match and didn't count." The owner caught wind of this and arranged a little something special for the Nid player and his Plot Armor Tyrant. He set up various battles for various resources and mumbo-jumbo which he faked just so he could force the Nid player to face the Dark Eldar player again (which the Dark Eldar player was cool with) and history repeated itself, this time in front of the owner.
The Nid player would never change throughout all the years I've known him, eventually burning so many bridges and eventually being caught cheating so many times that the last time I faced him, he was playing Khorne Daemonkin and, knowing he was going to cheat, I planned accordingly with my orks: Very few slow units with mostly Gunwagon supports. He ended up killing around fifteen models before I managed to table him turn 3 and this was apparently the final nail in the coffin for the Daemon army, because he sold it shortly after the loss.
Another delightful story is a short but nasty one: Had a new Tau player come into the store and another resident WAAC merciless mother fucker took him up on the offer to get a game in. It was the tau players first game. He had mostly infantry and two suits in total.
The WAAC plays a Knight.
Of the entire Tau force, only two units have the ability to even scratch the Knight which he kills turn 1. Never saw the tau player after that.
I got pleanty of these as my area is rife with these assholes but those are some which just stood out.
Thanks for the story, I enjoyed it :)
I feel bad for that Tau player though.
The WAAC player plays a Knight. _A Knight._ In what I'm guessing was a 500 point game, since that's the cost of _a Knight._
I almost want to say that's GW's fault and not necessarily a WAAC player case.
As a Tau player myself, my only option against that at 500 points is to follow suit and field a single Tiger Shark AX-1-0.
@@VestedUTuber It was around a 500-700 game with a player who picked up one of the older "Starter Set" boxes with the Kroot, Devil Fish, Single Suit and Stealth suits. If I'm not mistaken, he was heavily into infantry and bought more fire warriors and one of the mono-suit boxes from back in the day to have as another commander I think. Basically out of the list, two-three models, not units, models, could barely scratch the thing. It was...one of the Forgeworld knights if I'm not mistaken, the one with the Gamma-ray. He'd just finished getting the army [He had two FW and two Standards] them all painted. Anyway, he was one of the worst people to play as he was disgusting rules lawyer when it wasn't pertaining to him who dragged games to a screeching halt constantly. Awesome dude to shoot the shit with, never to play.
As for the whole "Who to blame" thing, GW may have made the Knights one of 7th Ed's most loathed things to fight if you weren't a knight or had knife-ears, as that meant you were always sending in something to punch the shit out of it [I'm an ork player. I'd lose more models to the resulting explosion than the knights firing as the only means to topple them outside of running up and punching them were Tankbusta's, who could given a turn or two with protection] but this? He knew the player was new, he knew the guy had very few things that could hurt the Knights as he was a Tourney-player and he had an army of Vanilla marines he could have played the guy with.
He chose to be a dick and to "Show off" his army.
And I'm kind of there with you now, but as an ork player? The removal of pie-plates this edition along with orks BS LD rules of "Use model counts of unit or unit within x inches" always means im stampeding up the board and can now drag down Knights in a few turns while suffering pittances in response. Also, wouldn't a Stormsurge be decent against a knight? I know the current Melee variants of knights go for around 350ish. How many points is a SS walker currently?
@@Shinchibi
A Stormsurge would be decent against a knight, but 1. I don't have one and 2. Stormsurges don't have Macro weapons. Tiger Shark AX-1-0s do, and Macro weapons shred through anything with the Titanic keyword. Additionally, the Tiger Shark is a flyer with the Airborne, Supersonic, Titan Hunter and Hard to Hit rules, which means they're going to have a hell of a time bringing it down and with its insane movement range I can basically put it anywhere on the board within one to two turns and unload a full barrage on those Knights. If I'm up against someone who's Munchkining Knights or other big walkers, I'm not interested in matching them unit for unit, I want to teach them a lesson.
Anyway, a Stormsurge is 382pts without upgrades.
Anyway, when I said I could fit a Tiger Shark AX-1-0 in a 500pts list I hadn't gotten the new datasheet yet. Turns out they now come out at a bit over, at 583 points. Still doable in 700pts, though.
You can get the same effect with two leman russ in a 500 pt game. Just don't make shit lists when you play against random neckbeards, or maybe just play with close friends?
This was PERFECTLY said imo. Thanks for putting content like this out there.
I have just started Tyranids after hearing their lore and falling in love for them.
I have only got a small pack of hormogaunts at the moment and only plan on keeping my entire army small-er for now. This is with the intention to fight small games and, if I win said fights, slowly start purchasing slightly more creatures of various sizes to somewhat emulate the growth of a tyranid swarm as the biomass from previous games is 'collected'. This is just for my own ammusment as their 'performance' in battle will dictate the hives growth.
So yeah, I think I'm a casual fluff lover.
Great video mate.
Meanwhile in Hearthstone: All the dragon aspects and the lich king working together to stop a tribe of murlocs
Always talk to whoever you are playing with and ask them how they want to play. Persoanlly i hate playing against that guy in my local store and nobody will play him. I do like the guidelines you put near the end to play casually. I think that stores should do more casual events and narrative events to allow people to play more.
agreed.
There is a fine line between semi-comeptitive tho and casual. For example I can play a mono-black legion list, with no FW stuff and still be called "that guy" for using cultists instead of CSM because CSM are hot trash. I don't want to play people with no knowledge of the game and get salty for trying to optimize their favorite army.
This video should be seen by everyone in the community. Really good job!
DUDE I LOVE the video, keep up the good work, man i remember my first tournament i tried to playa narrative custode list, and i got demolished by knights, 60% of player brought knights, way back in July, honestly by the second day of the tournament i was to upset that i really could not play because I was an all melee army who usually got shot off by turn 2. I actually left the last match, however not before making sure my opponent had an opponent to play against since there was a no show at another table. My local community wondered where i diseapered to where honestly I could not take it, i went in with a little douse of hope that maybe my list would do well, only to have it extinguished by my first 3 matches, by the way the first match i played against the 2 place of that tournament, that dude was super try hard with his tau, the judge even came in saying that we should switch to proper opponents since my opponent had a history on newcommers, as in he was not lenient at all, however being as cocky as i was i said no it was fine, i would come to regret that as it was all downhill from there as he destroyed me. The other games were against knights and i did not bring stuff in my custodes to really deal with them. I really wish I had this video before then. To this day however that tournament has made me more competitive and i know what to expect at my next one, and fully plan on coming more prepared. Sadly this means i cannot use all custodes for my competitive list since the castellan and imperial guard are so much better game wise, but my custodes still remain my favorite army for casual play. I'm gonna show this video to my community since mine is a bit weird in that it has a mix but not where its half players do this half do that, but in where the regulars have both a casual and competitive side to them. This video would be great to show to some veterans of the hobby when playing with newcomers too since competitive can make some new people who are just getting in feel discouraged if all they fight against are top teir armies that squash them.
Great video!
One habit I have adopted in competitive and casual games is to stop asking for "go backs." I would rather lose and learn from my mistake than have my opponent resent being nice and losing a game for it.
That's a great way to look at it.
Yeah I do that too. I point out my own mistake, tell my opponent that you learn a lot from making mistakes and then continue playing.
If they forget something and then ask if they can just do it now real quick, I usually let them do it.
People like me who can handle owning up to their mistakes wont even ask that in the first place, so denying your opponent‘s request will pretty much guarantee them being upset...
@@Raubk0pierer Depending on the environment, I may hold my opponent to my standards, but more often than not I'll remind a player about something before they forget. I'd rather point out a mistake as it's being made (eg forgetting to shoot with a unit) rather than have them ask for a go back. And depending on the level of competition, watching an opponent make a mistake like that and denying a "go back" is a form of gotcha-bitch and that is a violation of the social contract.
@@DaddyOandSon
Oh yeah, forgot to write that but I agree.
Pointing out that something is being forgotten as it's happening is the right thing to do, as it is less disrupting for the game flow :)
It depends on the game for me. I'll give go backs in a casual game, but with the connotation that I may ask for one. If neither party wants to do go backs, so much the better.
The one exception I make is for a misunderstanding of the rules--where someone clearly would have acted in a certain way if they understood the rule worked as such.
As a casual player/lore lover I invest alot of time painting and building an army that I like. As you said I just wanna roll dice and have fun, when I encounter a hyper competitive player I just tell them my goal. I don't really label them as "that guy" because they are trying to have fun on their level. but I do encounter people who try to tell me how to paint and how to play the game. Which pisses me off to no end, those types of people I label as "that guy"
I will subtly throw games for the narrative or fluff players in our meta. Forget the deep strikers till the last turn, assault my guys off of objectives to fail to score... and in one case assaulting his dead pile rather than targeting a unit on an objective. I've actually gotten quite good at losing or drawing games in a believable fashion. I would even say it's improved my play when tryharding. Intentionally playing badly is easier when you know what you're attempting to screw up, and tryharding is easier when you know which things will lose you the game.
Why would you do that? Just so that your opponent doesnt start to cry because they lost?
Toning down lists is one thing, but purposefully throwing a game is something else entirely.
@@Raubk0pierer It can also be simply to go with the narrative he wants to give to his armies and those *fluffy* games ;)
@@Fayheurblode
You lost me there, what do you mean?
rpk 0714 sometimes, losing a game is part of the story you envision for your army... Some other time, in some campaign cases, winning by a certain margin would mean have a huge advantage for the following plays
@@Fayheurblode
Reading this, my decision to only play matched games just got reinforced ;)
The only situation where I wouldnt be having fun playing a game of 40k is when I find out my opponent is holding back or purposefully throwing the game.
That is just disrespectful in my opinion.
You either die a hero, or live long enough to see yourself become the villain.
You could really feel the soul you put into this video, and it's a good video indeed. I hope your local group sees this and gets a better understanding.
As a casual player (and honestly at this point, more of a hobbyist then a player) this was enlightening. I'm usually the player who gets squashed, and after dedicating dozens of hours into research, assembly, painting and all that comes with the hobby, losing for 3 hours was hard. It seems silly in retrospect, but It's been a long time since I've played 40K.
I may give it a go again. Thanks for helping me understand more!
I'm in a weird middle ground where I love the hobby, it calms me and it's the timesink I need after I quit MMOs, and I'm a good repository for lore on certain factions. But I'm also fiercely competitive to a fault and try to make my lists lore appropriate yet still do my best to equip the best gear and use the best possible units. It's hard to balance these two schools of thought, and it can be pretty stressful, I agonised over including Reivers in my Blood Angels force because they would have fit the play style of fast brutal blitzkrieg attacks but the new codex states how the Rievers are frowned upon within the Angels for being dishonorable and often overly cruel. In the end I decided against, but as I said it is very hard for me to balance my love of the lore amd hobby with my competitive impetuous spirit.
Same boat. I love Tau and their lore, but I'm competitive as a player. Thankfully, Tau lore allows for pretty much any army configuration that works, and their rules are consistently strong, so I've been able to have the best of both worlds. So much so that it pissed off my closest and most loyal of play partners, my brother, who ironically helped me brainstorm a lot of the lists that I put together. If two close brothers can get into arguments over competitive play in this game, what chance do strangers have?
In Poland EVERY single wargamer is a tryhard, most of us are just really bad at our respective games.
Yeah this is why I stopped playing
Have 2 lists.
List one is for fun.
List two is to break the competition.
My fluffy list is my GKs. My competitive list is my TSons/Black Legion (modeled as Night Lords).
Poor Night Lords :( The Black of the Legion is not in Midnight Clad, but Terror Tactics is super situational.
It's funny, I don't play competively, but enjoy your videos the most. Always to the point, never silly. Always look forward to your new videos.
I'm a very casual Fluff player. Necron is my army. My army is built around what a Necron legion would look like, not how it could win better against grey knights. With necrons being already beyond nerfed, You can guess how often I win. however it's the attitude of the opponants I had the luck to play against that makes me have fun even if I loose. Your video earned you another subscriber! you hit it right on the nail!
Not gonna lie this video changed my attitude to the gang entirely, so thanks for that dude!
I mean, as someone just getting into the hobby, I'm probably more focused on the hobby side and 'fluffy' armies but that doesn't stop me from ensuring that if I hit a 2k list it won't get tabled by the second turn by the local competitive Death Guard player...
Who plays Death Guard competitively?! They don't even have an long range AT and are as slow as Necrons...
@@bobuscesar2534 The guy in question has like 3-4 different armies, Death Guard just stands out at the current pain in the butt to deal with because A: of the two six-shelf cabinets to allow people to hold armies at the shop three of the shelves are basically flooded with Nurgle by various people and B. During the short snit of time people were playing Killteam before giving up he's the guy that lugged Blight Launchers and so on into that game and was constantly tabling people in 2-3 rounds. Jokes on him, it was an objective game he was against with me, buuuut....
@@gratuitouslurking8610
This fucking long sentence still hasn't answered how Death Guard is supposed to be Competitive in 40k.
@@bobuscesar2534 they are about as comp as chaos gets thanks to their demon allies where they can be surprisingly mobile also death guard's ability to stack non psychic mortal wounds can be down right absurd on top of being generally a pain in the ass to hurt
Plus Custodes and watch him tear his hair out in frustration trying to hurt you as you walk up the table with your entire army of multi wound weapons
I believe i am a mix of competitive and hobby player. Like i love blood angels and the imperium and wanna build like lore friendly lists but i am also down for being like oh that combo works good and these units are super solid, let's use those. I like to try to find a good middle ground with hobby and competition
You're more of an experimentalist player rather than competitive. A competitive player builds lists with the only goal of winning a game through the use of the most powerful units (and maybe combos) of the game.
I play Tau, so I can give you some examples to clarify the subtle difference: The competitive player is the one who brings always three riptides at any given match. An experimentalist instead would notice that markerlights and cadre fire blades boost up a lot your infantry, so it would try out the combo of shooting the +2 BS markerlight with the fire blade and use the 1 CP stratagem transform that marker light in 1+D3 markers.
The competitive player looks for an easy win, the experimentalist one wants fun while playing and ways to try out new things with his minis.
Alternative Title: Chaos Marine explains how to fight without getting corrupted
I have lost all but 2 of my battles, the tutorial, and when the enemy forfeited after I placed down 1 flamer, just 1, not even finished placing down the whole unit.
Looking at the pictures and seeing so many Guardsman doing their duties and dying for the emperor makes me proud to play the red shirt army.
What if you're running a fluffy army and still win all the time? For example, currently I'm playing a Tau list in which I cram in as many battlesuits as possible (since I love giant robots so much) but with one condition: no duplicates except for maybe a squad of 3 crisis suits since that seems to be how they operate fluff wise. And with this I still win 90% of the time. Am I being a try-hard for maximizing the potential of my units and taking advantage of stratagems? I never like the idea of intentionally underperforming since it seems disrespecting to my opponents.
i like being competitive casual meaning trying my best but making jokes about the battle to try and get my opponent to laugh
*Casual player here!*
Great video! I can really relate to this.
I used to play x wing before 2.0 came out, and I played Empire. My friends that got me into the game we’re hyper competitive but never really got involved with tournaments for unknown to me reasons. I on the other hand am a casual player who was just looking to have fun, and would bring lists that were close to things you would expect from the movie and narrative rather than tournament style lists.
Of course they only played competitive lists, and my friend who flew Scum pretty much refused to change his list once he found what was crushing the competitive scene. After being crushed week after week, the game was no longer fun for me as they were my only friends that I knew that played. I pretty much stopped playing after a few months of that, and once 2.0 came out I gave up completely because Fantasy Flight wants waaaaay too much money to keep me playing in 2.0
It’s sad, I miss playing the game, and I know my friends would still play if I asked, but I also know that same Scum list will be the only thing he will ever fly, so I don’t even want to bother with it, and will probably end up selling my entire fleet. I got them into 40k and I’m starting to see the same behavior happening here, which has caused me to branch out and play at stores more.
Moral of the story is I should have figured sooner during the x wing days that things wouldn’t change with my friends being super competitive, and now that I know that I can try to better prep myself in my 40k games against them (usually still lose though as I find competitive lists for chaos too boring to play) but I still have a slightly better chance than I did before (mostly thanks to this Chanel!), and now I’m building a community of new casual friends to play with that share my love of the fluff.
I hope super competitive people watch this video and try to tone it down with their non-competitive friends, and that more casual players can identify these competitive players sooner so they can know what to expect.
BassGuyEJ
Well sounds like your buddy is the prime example of why Brady decided to make this video in the first place.
A non-tournament player who exclusively plays OP netlists...
Sounds like he is incapable of taking responsibility for his own mistakes, so he tries to avoid having to deal with that by playing lists that have a very good chance of winning the game with or without him as a player. Sad.
You did well to try to find some non-toxic folks to play with, but bear in mind that with people like your friend there it‘s not a problem of competitive players that ruin the fun for casual players.
It‘s the problem of mentally weak persons who might throw themselves in front of a bus if they lose a game and would have to reflect on their mistakes/shortcomings and put in some work for (personal) growth.
Dude there are loads of fun ways to play chaos competitively. I play tzeentch and nurgle and love them both. I would suggest mixing daemons from one god with the relevant 40k faction and you'll be good. Death guard and Nurgle is great and Thousand sons and Tzeentch is also great! Many ways to build too depending on which side you lean into more the daemons or the other one.
@@Paintopia_VR For sure! I never said that chaos can't be played competitively, I just personally don't find current competitive chaos lists fun. I play Iron Warriors, and like to play a siege-type gun line with a mostly sit back and shoot style, which chaos is ok at, but there are other armies that are far better at it IMO. I'm currently building a daemons army as well, but it will be a Khorne daemons army, where as when I play my Iron Bois I tend to go mark of Slaanesh for EC during the shooting phase.
@@BassGuyEJ if your looking for a gunline in chaos then your doing it wrong they do not do that. You want ad mech or guard for your gunline, deamons are a more melee focus amry with shooting support. I personally am glad they are not a gunline as that is the most boring way to play the game imo. You have basically narrowed the game down to deployment and target priority which is pretty non interactive. Melee is much more tactical and enjoyable to play when you learn how but no it is not easy like the gun line option. Fun for me is strategic and tactical depth with cool models which daemons have.
Wandering Turtle meh, to each their own. I personally don’t feel that there’s a ‘wrong” way to play 40k when you play casually. I like recreating what I see from the novels from the IVth legion when I play, which is relentless gunfire. I have melee too, I never put all my eggs in one basket, but again to each their own
How not to become a Heretic!
Rule #1 Don't commit Hersey
Rule #2 questioning an Inquisitor is Hersey
The main reason I got out of MtG and into WH40k is because of 'that guy'.
At an as CASUAL marketed event we got a draw because we then ran out of time in the 3rd round. I wasn't really experienced at that time so I wasn't the fastest player of course. He used this to guilt trip me into giving him the win.
I never really cared about winning and I only had a budget deck that wasn't great that I had much fun playing with though. But this mentality put me so off that I just walked away from the hobby.
One of the first things the clerk told me at my local GW is that when people would bring a really good competetive army list they would announce it first and ask if it was ok so they could test it without their oponnent feeling bad for getting wrecked.
So does bringing a Bane Blade to each game count as "Binging that guy"?
I dunno. The problem is that the big models are really nice and imposing. You definitely can't say that no narrative player could ever fall in love with their bane blade, considering the time it takes just to model the thing.
That said, if it's grey and caked with super glue from being remodelled for every edition when the optimal loadout changes... ehhh... Then you're that guy.
@@TheSolitaryEye I spent a lot of time on my Bane Blade to make look more imposing.
It depends, if you bring one of them to a 2000 point game you're fine, if it's a 500 point game.... Come on dude
At Granite City Waaghfest, we only have a custom etched "best general" mug each year. All the real prize support is just raffled as door prizes. It works for us
Eloquently put. While I personally enjoy 40k for the modeling and story (the Ultramarines novels are actually what got me into it), I totally understand the fact that this is still a contest of some form and some people get more competitive about it. I'm glad you raised the point that competition has it's place, as does enjoyment of just a big table of brightly colored space knights and chittering bugs.
40ks like building a house and SW legion is like building a shed from homedepot
Check this out dude,
I am highly impressed with not just your honesty and your willingness to use your own experiential knowledge to help others inprove or avoid but with the way in which you deliver this information. The anecdotal or, personal experience method of teaching is becoming a more accepted way of education even in a professionally slothful field such as I occupy (Substance Abuse/Social Services). You are a very articulate and self aware person.
.
.
And BTW, I have been talked to with far less respect than I am personally comfortable with by other WAACs at social tournaments because I kitbash THE FUCK out of my Space Wolves. I know that a lot of people KB but I found it downright annoying that a Lore Nazi would make an issue out of it at a group get together.
He quickly found out that only one of us in that exchange was. ot going to get the results he was looking for......🥋
Anyway, you are a good example to look at.
Peace
He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster. And if you gaze long into an abyss, the abyss also gazes into you
I am a hobby > game hobbyist, but my friend kinda isn't. He doesn't really netlist or goes out to tournaments but he collects models to play and to win. We have a playfield at my home on which we almost weekly play. The only time I defeated him was when I set up a scenario in which he had to change his strategie to being passive and setting up ambushes. He only needed to hide, but instead he still rushed ahead and got crushed after which he blamed the mode for being unfair even though he could have won if he tried. He also never surrenders so games go on till someone wins and the other loses.
A better "house rule" for your softer tournaments, or perhaps even for the game as a whole, is to disallow cross-detachment use of CP. This way, the CP generated/refunded from a Guard detachment, can only be used by the Guard detachment, instead of being funnelled into a Castellan, Slamguinius, etc. Some multi-faction armies are "fluffy", but also break the game because they allow repetitive use of strategems that seem to have been intended for very limited use.
Another option is to spot points. This allows you to bring your competive army, Be challenged, learn to play your army competitively, and still give the other guy a decent chance to win. I used to spot 250pts in a 2000pt list and not even tell the other player I did this. IE I would take 1750pts worth of competitive list to a 2000pt game.
I’ve always been a hobby first/ collector for fluffs sake hobbies. But I enjoy the channel for meta and lore analysis based off of news and changes in the community.
I hope to eventually play my armies if I can focus my hobby work, but it may take some more list building and optimisation if I cared about winning.
For now I like my armies for their looks/ aesthetics and fluff.
Our group set up a tier system where people can self evaluate or peer evaluate each other's lists and give it a competitive rating. That way, we're more likely to get more evenly matched games. It's totally subjective, but it's helped ease people into expectations of what they'll be running against. Our current narrative campaign is flexible where people can run whatever style they want, but they'll get bonus campaign points if the game ends up being close within 3VP.
I play in a mix of WAAC (by WAAC, I'm the guy who likes to bring in those really good units to win and destroy and kill) and heavy casual, like I won't really do tournaments, but I still love to also table my opponents, like I've done to many Space Wolves. Also had a very fun War of Attrition against a Imperial Guard, and my army is an Aeldari under Ulthwe rules (yet I forget to use their FNP rule from time to time, plus it saves me points on my WS and HW since now I don't need to give them Spirit Stones, since it's the same FNP rule that Ulthwe does)
Don't know if you'll see this comment, but; thank you for making this video. Said everything I would want to and it's great that it is said by someone who has dome competitive and narrative
Well done lad
At a local club near me, they had an army composition category with a "fluff" score which was about 30% of the entire scoring rubric. If you had a super optimized competitive army, you would score lower on this, but may score higher on the mission wins (which was 50%) and vice versa. It was an interesting approach to try and get casual players to get along with competitive players in the tournament.
Forgot to mention: Said club had a majority of fluff players.
My local tournament did this once as well. I personally don't like this because who gets to decide what is fluffy? If I bring a pure iron warriors lists that includes Cultists and daemon princes I might think that's fluffy, but maybe my opponent doesn't. Or what if I bring Guilliman and primaris marines because its fluffy but my opponent thinks that primaris go against the original fluff so therefor its not fluffy? I think that's not really a good way to handle it since it could be used to attack certain players just because you don't like their army, because it could very well be fluffy but it doesn't agree with your interpretation of the fluff.
Great topic! One thing I think you missed about the comparison with video games or TCGs is the time to actually play the game. A common refrain in competitive video gaming is just "play more". Telling someone to sit down every single night and make sure they play at least 5 games. Cool, that probably takes a few hours, done in the comfort of your own home and requires no travel for a single person. Good luck getting a single game of 40k a day, most people seriously struggle to get one game a week.
This gets to my advice for how to be competitive, treat every non-tournament game as a chance to improve, you want to learn something that improves your game. Competitive is typically defined as "winning", when I think it should be "learning". Being competitive to me is about getting better, which leads to winning, rather than having the goal of winning. Having this means I get to play "competitively" all the time, even against a newbie, well that's an awesome chance for me to learn how to use this unit I've avoided using before now, or even learning his army by helping him learning his list and suggesting strategy that would beat me.
You have some great points.
I have a story about my recent experience at a tournament. I went 1-4 which is fine, I took a casual country boy list to a tournament in a big city and got treated exactly as you'd expect. Learnt a fuckload though, made some new friends, had a great time.
Anyway, on game 4 (two day tournament) I hear a lot of hustle and bustle on the main table. I'm busy getting my ass handed to me, but I can hear them getting quite heated, and one of the TOs gets the small crowd forming nearby to back off - clearly an important thing is going on.
So afterwards, I go and ask who they are and what was going on, and the answer I got was "As diplomatically as possible, just two guys playing way too hard especially given that neither of them are in contention for the prize."
And that really kinda made me feel better about the whole thing, and I went into my next game thinking "Fuck it, let's just try to have some fun" and I did, it was the greatest game I had. I got thoroughly flogged because I decided to throw out the plan that wasn't working - and use a plan that was even worse - but it was great anyways.
This lesson applies to all games, there is a time to be try hard and a time to be fluffy be aware when the time is appropriate for either.
What's the source on the pic at 12:38?
I have only been playing 40k since 2018 & have learnt a lot from you. Esp with watching your Tabletop video! One thing I have noticed in almost ever game I play... Terrain rules... Do people ever use them?
Sometimes, but not usually tbh.
Who are the people in the picture at 12:27?
IMHO the proper approach is to remember that 40k is not a sport, and treating it as one is missing the entire point of the game. A good competitive player knows when to bring their LVO list and when to bring a non-100% optimized list to casual night. You become "That Guy" when you turn up to 40k night at your FLGS with a killer tournament list without prior notice and end up facing and crushing someone who showed up with a casual list for fun games. You become "That Guy" when you slam anything other than Matched Play (and competitive play in particular) as being wrong or laugh at people who want to use Power Levels or a fun narrative scenario instead of the bland (IMHO) ITC missions. The sad truth is that people who have the competitive approach and try to force it on the community one of two things happen: Either the community embraces it and anything other than cutthroat competitive play dies, and never shows up again, or you experience what happened to you and the competitive player gets shunned. It's typically binary.
There is a big reason why Army Composition and Sportsmanship were part of the scoring (and still are in the official GTs in the form of "Favorite Army"); to prevent people from shitting on the background of the game to focus on winning. It might be a "valid" approach to the game, but it's also one that I'm old enough to remember GW themselves pointing out it was pretty much missing the point of the game (I started playing in 1996!).
Just getting into the game...and I can only say!! Dude!! Great video!!
The important is to talk with your opponent on your upcomming game, if tge guy says: bring it on i want to be challenged or tonight i just want to try differents units, just listen to them and have a good time
I like to challenge myself by winning with my fluff armies. I’ve won many competitive games and didn’t find it fun Slaughtering my opponents.
When they spent hours getting the paint just right on a unit just to have that unit removed off the table without doing a single thing.....yeah that sucks.
First and foremost it is a game.
I play to have fun, when it is time to crank it up to win then i do so.
Good vid, you touched base on points I agree with.
thanks man I was a casual player then I bought Death Gard ( first army is Necron) I keep 2 army one casual and one competetive so this way I can enjoy both world
I had that experience when trying to branch out into Warmachine in like 2016/2017. The local scene where I live is nothing BUT try-hards, spam-lists and min-maxing lists. I'm a filthy casual who loves to paint, lore etc. so I perceived the overall atmosphere as very cold and unfriendly among the other players. Never touched the minies again which is a shame because I do like the overall lore and feel of the Privateer Press games.
So long as you keep the cheese where it belongs, play as you will.
If you bring a tournament list to your local store to smash the fluff players in order to please your ego I would encourage you to leave this hobby and find something else that's soothes your ego. Toxic and WAAC players don't belong here in this hobby
I agree. This is like taking a real gun to a Nerf-War. Your opponents will never play with you again.
@@bobuscesar2534 well leaving them dead does give you alot of attention from alot of people xD
I am ok with tournament lists in fluff/casual games as long as my opponent informs me about it and has a valid reason (eg. has tournament in a couple of days and wants to try out some stuff).
I don't agree, if they have paid cash they should be allowed to play
The problem I have with that sort of thing is that competitive and WAAC is really subjective. Pre CA, I was playing a list with Azrael Blob--mono list, no soup or anything. In comp....DA is what--tier 3 at best at the time? But something like THAT made me the black sheep for a good long while, and that frustrated me a lot, because not only is plasma heavy DA lore friendly, but against good armies like Dark Eldar, Knights, Guard, etc, that was basically the only way to really have a chance because DA was so limited, and SM grossly underpowered.
So it really sucks to be punished for optimizing the army you like, because the army you like was sorta bad at the time.
Great story.
I'm one of the lucky ones that doesn't mind playing and most likely losing against *that guy* .. so long as they are willing to help give me technical pointers to help learn the new edition.
It kind of sucks because I have a "that guy" friend with Warmachine/Hordes; I played a new army against him and he almost never gave me a minute to read what my guys even do. Had zero fun and was over it after turn 2.
This is perhaps the best video I've seen in relation to how Competitive VS Narrative should be treated. XD
great video, great self reflection about what kind of player you are and what that means to other around you!
I built a list to stop a "that guy" at an escalation league we're doing. That guy showed up...only he was me. Tank commander, basilisk, and hellhound at 50p pts is a bit tough for people to eliminate
iam coming from the mtg competitive community and your video came right on time! i had some trouble in the past in the same way in w40k you describe because iam the comp. and a friend of mine its a casual player.
Long ago when neccrons first came out, I joined 40k. I made a necron army and spent a long time painting and even converting some of my models. I finally got the nerve to play a game at a shop. Played against "that guy" blood Angels list and was phased out by turn 2. It was so demoralizing, and his attitude was so toxic, I quit after that night and put up my painted army on Ebay.
I have recently just came back and have a similar mentality that you explain in this video. I know I'll never truly be competitive as I just don't have the time required for practice, and I enjoy the hobby portion more, but I try to give the competitive player the benefit of the doubt and try to build a list that gives them a bit of challenge even though I know its probably a losing battle. It's also why I play the "bad guy" armys so that in my mind, the bad guy loses in my narrative, but we always come back for more.
What set is the sprue at 1:08 from?
looks like sternguard veteran
What do I do when the units I like are perceived to be overpowered? I run a salamanders list that has 2 leviathan dreadnoughts 2 rapier carriers and a deredeo in a 2 battalion pure space marine list. With a chapter master a lieutenant and 2 techmarines. The rest of the points has scouts and 2 devastator squads kitted out for mortal wounds, and a primaris ancient. I feel that I’m perceived to be that guy because even when games are close my opponents do not like playing against me.
Maybe just bring those things once in awhile, or let your opponents know ahead of time what you are bringing so they can tailor their list for it. It might not seem fair to you but at least everyone will enjoy the game more that way, and it won't feel like a "gotcha" moment when they see your army.
IMO the ancient are basically boneless version of the dreaded ynnari soulburst that have garnered quite an infamous reputation at my FLGS at the end of 7th ed, it just not fun when your turn get interrupted by ancient banner or soul burst and having to pick up your dead model on your own turn.
your list seem solid and competitive but I don't feel it is overpowered at all unlike the current loyal32+slam captain+imperial knight meta
Almost Pro Gaming Well the thing is I don’t have much in the way of other models to work with. And my opponents know this. It feels that if I want to play at the store I like I either need to buy a new army entirely, something that is economically infeasible on top of being a real feelsbad experience when you drop 1k in a month to build an army that looks cool and is something you enjoy playing with. Or I have to move to another store.
Haha sounds like Lucius the Eternal soul armor... You became HIM
We play in a small city 3man group, 1 hour from a city with up to 20 players and we often try to stick to rules to be better at the Game and show them who's BOSS when we go to tournaments there.
One guy in my group is competitive/hobbiest and the other is full hobby/play for fun; and i always try to play acordingly.
I'm full on ForFun i play wacky list, and try the suboptimal hivefleets but i know that i have to bring the not so cr*ppy ones when i face competitive guy, i think we both have fun in the clutch wins or losses and we always try to analyse what we could have done better
I agree with your advice, but I think the onus is also on the other people too. Instead of ghosting you, for instance, if you had asked me for a game and I know you're going tryhard, that's what I'd say. "Hey man, you seem to be really into the competitive scene, which is cool, but not my thing." If you came back with "Oh, good point, let me build a fluffy list and just have some fun if you're cool to play that way?" I'd at least give you a chance. If you're good on your word, even if you win, then I'm good to play you again. But if you just went tryhard a again, then you're done.
My point being, this is good advice for people like you. But the fluffy players (which I am one) also need to be more vocal about that kind of thing. One of my main playing partners is a guy who likes competitive, but we always show sportsmanship, let some things slide, and he tends to use newer lists that he hasn't tested much or otherwise isn't the top-tier thing that he's going for when he plays against me. At least now. At first he was hyper competitive and I told him basically that. Something along the lines "I don't think either of us are gonna have fun cause I'm bringing fluffy and you're competitive so if it's just a stomp you'll be bored and I'll be frustrated and neither of us will enjoy it." Put it like that, like I said, he tends to try new stuff or weird combos or even just more fluffy in general lists when we play now.
THANK YOU SO MUCH. i'm going to a mini tournament on sunday and this will help a lot thanks
Very even handed take Mr B, I think with 40k some pre-game negotiations are pretty much required, on my local gaming FB pages folks usually qualify the type of match they looking for to avoid or at least minimise mismatches, heck even me with my Play to Win tendencies has a Eldar list featuring all my old metal mini's consisting of many many banshees, scorpions and tiny Mk1 Avatar as opposed to Crazy Cat lady and her Shining chums list
I am more of a guy who just wants to have fun but at the same time I can play competitively with my army and still use the fluff of my army.
Recently started painting my first models ( Cadian Guardsmens 180) I’ll honestly just be playing to have fun rather than just trying to win. More there so just show off my endless amounts of Guardsmen ;)
How not to be that Guy while also being that guy: bring a knight army, a Renegade Knight army
That's what my GW store owner is doing.
This is remarkably true.
I have a friend that always tries his best to have the most efficient army. And as much as i appreciate the guy, i don't want to play him anymore, even tho i play imperial guard who's considered a top tier faction.
He doesn't seem to understand that what i appreciate about the game is the aestetic of it, and building my army according to "what looks cool to me"and not what's strong. To make the matter worst, i often play massiv ammounts of infantry, and the few last game i played were all about spending 1 hour placing the terrains and more than a hundreds miniatures to get stomped by unpainted eldars in a few turns whith very little to no hope to achieve any kind of minor victory whithout outrageous luck on my side.
I realized how much of a difference the mindset of the players had on the experience. To others, i AM that guy because infantry IG can still kick some serious ass and i take ages to get my army ready, which is annoying, so i try to relativise it. But i'd still call games whith that friend "bad experiences" regardless.
I found out that asking your opponent prior: "Cool game or tryhard mod ?" is kind of a good way to avoid that, as even tho it might not be possible for everyone, you're both gonna be aware of the type of game you're going to play and can plan your list accordingly or decline the game if you really don't want to.
I always feel odd in the current state of the game. Im an Imperial knight player. But I dont take an imperial mixed army. All I field are imperial knights because I love the fluff and lore of house Terryn. I typically take 2 questoris knights and 6-7 armigers in a 2k game. I enjoy the army a ton, but some people have assumed I powergame because most people at my store think its cheesy and spam to field nothing but knights. I don't see it as spam, just as playing another army.
I usually joke back at them by saying "Well I play imperial knights, thats like saying a space marine player is spamming tactical squads." But I sometimes either end up throwing the game to their favor, or asking if they're still having fun.
Buuuut everyone wants me on their team for our apoc games when im fielding a whole knight house of 13 questoris knights and 11 armigers.
An obvious Spy Christ, how much disposable income do you make?
@@angryskeletonpope2334 most of it ive gotten half off from stores selling preowned knights or older sprues. I make enough to get a knight every now and then if I want a painting project
I've got a friend who is stupid competitive to the point where just about everyone at our local shop loves it when he loses and will encourage other people to crush him. But lately he could bring a 10 man squad from his army and players would still turn him down even if they were allowed to use something like an Imperial Knight against those models.
The sad part is he knows he's turned into "That Guy" and wants to try to undo the damage but he's made players so salty and angry that they don't trust him anymore.
If he would like to gain back the trust of those people, he can try this: Go to each person individually that has a problem with him and say something like "Hey XXXX, I wanted to talk to you because I wanted to say sorry for making some of our past games not very enjoyable. I realize now that I can get out of hand when it comes to playing competitively and most of the time I try too hard to win which I now realize isn't in the right spirit of the game. So again, I just wanted to say sorry and I understand why you don't enjoy playing with me, but I just wanted you to know that if you're ever willing to change your mind I will try my best to make sure the game is enjoyable for both of us."
I was very lucky, I was always a narrative player and had been since 1999, after years and years of getting trashed, I made a narrative list that was able to hold it's own against competitive players, after a crazy win streak for a couple of years I stopped playing, now I have recently come back to the hobby, and have started night lords because I love the lore on them and the style,
Do I have to play tabletop? So far I just enjoy reading army book lore and stuff like FW Horus heresy .
Tzeench love it when there's conflict between these two types of players. All as planned.
I’m new and love my Custodes, and I play them with an adaptive competitive play style. The others in my group hate my army, and now I see why.
The problem that I have with the hobby is that even while playing casual or semi competitive there are just too much ''balance'' issues. You could go ''very competitive'' with a space marine list while your opponent goes with a ''semi competitive'' Tau list and he still blasts you off the board with relative ease. Or in another case, I made a fluffy green tide list with Orks and my opponent went with a competitive ad mech list and I absolutely stomped my opponent into the ground... It is quite hard to judge what is competitive and semi competitive in a lot of situations. When playing with friends I hate the fact that most games are just done by turn 3 and one of the 2 is almost annihilated. I cant remember a game that lasted till turn 4 or when I had a close game. The scale just tips over to one side real fast and that takes the fun out of it for me.. And then I become the ''other'' guy and start cussing or getting bored/frustrated... I myself like to play what I love but also with the win in mind. I don't mind losing at all, that is just a part of this game. But the balance between dexes make it too hard to enjoy the game sometimes. Some people suggested narrative or open play but I absolutely despise those game modes.
Reason why i haven't gotten into tabletop WH40K: I see it as a game first and a hobby second, BUT I'm also not the type of person to play-to-win; instead, I want to play all the armies, try all the strategies and combinations, and play a lot of games against a variety of armies that my friends also play.
The problem with this: it's too expensive to try out an army. Outside of borrowing someone else's units, your only option is to attempt to proxy units. Even then, proxies works mostly if you just want to try a different unit/equipment; NOT for proxying an entire army.
I own 1000s of MTG cards, not counting lands, many of which i got for the price between $0.01 and $0.30 ( with at least 4000 running closer to the $0.01 mark). I only need about 40 cards to make a deck so i have a huge number of options for my decks and i can keep a dozen decent decks on hand at any given time.
I'd consider buying the codex for each army i wanted to try, that's a fine price point. But I don't want to buy, assemble, and ( ultimately poorly) paint the pieces. I also don't want someone else to paint them because i would feel like the army was less "mine".
Personally i think 40k should move to video game(s). They wouldn't lose the hobbyists( reportedly the highest part of their consumer base) from their miniatures market. They could balance the game without codex reprints. The games would go MUCH faster and require less memorization of the rules for players. Calculations and rolls could be made instantly. Not to mention that it's probably the only way to get a player like me. I wouldn't mind paying $120 (maybe a bit more) for the access to every army and every unit in any quantity and the ability to customize color freely.
Never thought about it like this before.
I always played to win but i never played out of character for my army if that makes sense?
No needless deaths for my tau as an example
What people are currently angry about is that we went from the awsome modular 8th and 9th that was customisable for narative and Competitive folks to 10th which is geard completely geared towards Little Timmy and the WAAC Powergamer Dudebro crowd.
I have several Armies that literally couldn't be translated over because the whole killing off uber factions thing.
Nomote Imperial Crusade Armies.
Personally I am a player who looks at Warhammer as Hobby=Game. I care about making an army that doesn't just spam out the best units endlessly but i also want something that can in most circumstances still win against a foe who does the same or has a weaker competitive army. I don't play competitive yet but I do get a lot of enjoyment from just optimizing things to a certain point. I won't spam just the best units but I also won't make a completely suboptimal army that has no chance of winning but is the most lore friendly army I can build.
Also great advice regarding new tournament players. I might become one of those and I can indeed say that it would not be a fun experience if I was just tabled in such a way that it feels like there was just nothing I could do to stop whoever my opponent was. I find that close games are the most fun to play and those where you know you have already won are the least.
BEst thing you can do is ask your opponent wether he prefers flavy or turnament list. The second thing you should NEVER do as a competetive player is when you are facing someone who is completly new to the hobby...wiping the board with him like broom... what i do if i face a new player who is really new is explaining to him why i do specific moves.... also i do ask him from time to time if i can give him honest hints what moves are good if he wants to if not i will ask him after his move if i can give him advice what he shouldve done instead.
this initiateds a learning process that will lead to a deeper understanding of the game for the newer player.
Also not to make the most optimal move every time is also maybe a good option scince the biggest price you can win is a new player for the hobby.
I dont want to become compatative player but i wanna beat my friend who plays nids/genestlealer cult but as tau its hard even if i do better every new try i fail and he has like 500 piont below me and still i cant win what should i do? Then? How do tau win against nids?
Tau should be able to hold their own against those armies if you have the right build and deploy/play your army efficiently to make the best use of your Montka and Kouyan and For The Greater good. So I assume it might just be that you need some list building and Tau tactics help, which I can give you through my coaching services that I offer through Patreon if you're interested.
If games Workshop commissioned a video game studio to create a Starcraft 2-quality Warhammer 40k RTS, I and I'm sure many others would happily pay a subscription fee of up to $30-$40 a month just to play the game.
Trying to keep your sanity when painting eyes -_-