Some poor sod at my local shop wanted to try out imperial agents for fun, got the codex, and his first game ran directly into 3 c'tan run by a sweaty rules lawyer. He looked downright miserable
These players who think its fun to crush the newbie are the worst. They seem to be compensating for some inadequacy. I have seem this scenario many times of the years, and the Hobby loses that new player. I don''t throw games with newbies, but try to help them learn to use their army. Usually by telling them "that unit has two choices and giving them the pro and cons, then letting them pick"
That's just so sad. I agree with what the other commentator said. I have also seen A pro trying to crush a newbie in so many different games. It usually just ends up driving them off but in the same psychology that turns people into whales for mobile games these people can't help it but try and inflate their egos
I'm the rules lawyer that tells the good stuff and the bad stuff, for example I'll point out that their model has a FNP, or I'll remind them to chose an oath of moment.
Agreed and I play necrons xd I’ve played a necron mirror match at 1K points where my opponent brought a monolith and a night bringer (pre pariah nexus) That was the only time I’ve refused a match
look, if i play against someone who knows me and i show up with a fluffy imperial guard list just to face the most broken, tailored against my army list list. i refused to play against that.
I don’t even see how someone can have fun with that? Part of the fun is building an army list that can deal with multiple threats. Then responding to your opponent on the fly is where the fun comes from. Playing against a friend who you know brings a lot of infantry, then just rearranging your list to be nothing but anti-infantry. Is super boring. Oh, you win, congrats. Do you also go to the park to dunk on some 10 year olds playing basketball?
fair, but thats just an asshole move in general, even in my pretty competetive play group (even our fluffy players try to build the fluff they want in the best way possible) that would be a no go.
I still remember a complete artillery battery of Imperial Guard set up by my opponent after they knew I would field my World Eaters. The Berzerkers were torn to pieces and Khorne was very displeased that day. Following my army line of thought, I felt very angry as well.
@brainyskeletonofdoom7824 i agree skew lists suck everybody was "i don't like having to take troops to play a game. I'm getting taxed" you should be. You are planning a skew list. Skew tax.
To borrow some MTG terminology, there has to be a 'rule zero' conversation before turning up for a game. If both players want a gloves-off, no holds barred competitive match, fine, go for it. But if someone is playing fluffy chapter-accurate imperial fists and the other guys rocks up with 6 Ctan or statcheck daemons, the game is a non-starter. Those lists have their place, but both players need to agree
I run a bunch of blood thirsters and unclean ones when the opportunity arises. Skarbrand being one of my favorite painted models. Id still play them if they were dog 💩 I just love painting them. But most of my lists are thematic rather than competitive. My WE list only exists to move as fast as possible, kill as fast as possible and die as fast as possible.
@@FormerGovernmentHuman right there with you, I play Daemons and usually run Skarbrand, Thirster, GUO and LoC, rules be damned the models are ace. They happen to be pretty strong right now, I was more talking about the 6 GD lists you see floating around - as Auspex says here it's not actually that good of a list competitively but it will create non-games because of how skewed it is
Then: Me, playing 9th edition T'au with lots of fire warriors because that was what my parents kept buying for me for christmas in high school when I kept telling them I needed crisis suits and now having no money thanks to working as a package courier vs. space marine players running hyper-optimized tournament lists they 3D-printed last weekend with their paycheck from their job that they got through knowing people at the company. Now: Me, playing 10th edition T'au with the same exact list only now I can't even get up to 1500 points now vs. dreadnoughts wiping the board turn 2 every. Fucking. Time.
Bringing your fresh out-of-the-box Combat Patrol to the table and your opponent unloads a home-printed full scale Warlord Titan from their car and you think "Bet."
Someone did this to me with a forgeworld titan when I first started playing in 8th, I sold those models and didn’t want to play again for a while because it just wasn’t fun when that was the vibe that store encouraged
I remember a few editions ago someone refused to play me just because I was GSC with a patriarch and he'd heard about a convoluted combo for Mental Onslaught that could one shot a warlord titan. I tried explaining that 1) that required absurd levels of synergy that isnt realistic to pull off and 2) He wasnt playing titans and most units in his list could be turn 1 killed by most factions. The meme/echo chamber talk definitely has an impact.
My buddies banned my Eldar because the faction's 'Metawatch' win-rate was too high even though I didn't own a single model that was being used in the 'Combos'. I was running Guardians, Rangers and Striking Scorpions, for God's sake...
@@Cirac1 I know, but the internet was all parroting the line that "Eldar are overpowered". I played one game with my Eldar, beat my buddy pretty solidly, and they're all like "Yea, this is just proof. Eldar are just way too overpowered. You gotta play something else." It was that echo chamber thing you described, where they went into that game expecting the Eldar to be overpowered, and my luck and/or good play only confirmed that bias. My friends were serious enough about 40k to hear that Eldar were winning everything, but casual enough that they didn't know what those lists were actually comprised of. -_- That's why I dislike how Metawatch presents faction win-rates as a blanket statistic. We'll see that Beasts of Chaos are doing way better all of a sudden, but meanwhile that's only one particular fringe list using 12 of a model I don't have, for example.
@@GreyHunter88 Can't save dumb, people from being dumb. The group I play with has a few try harders in it, but we are all friends and all want to have fun, When I play the try-harder I say ok, today we can try-hard bring your skew list, and other times I will say, ok lets play something more balanced. And against the weaker players, I will take worse stuff, or suggest ways they can deal with my stuff. I want a close game, Winning doesn't matter to me just making it close.
I saw the thumbnail with 4 C'tans and instantly started throwing up and screaming in horror. Thanks, Auspex Tactics! Nothing like terror-induced flashbacks to start the day!
I’ve only ever refused one game, there had been a miscommunication. I turned up with a 1K points army only to question the number of units my opponent was deploying, to find he was expecting a 2K game. He kindly reworked his list to match mine. Other than that I like the challenge and chance for a glorious last stand - yes I play guard mainly.
but you didn't even refuse the game, you corrected a misunderstanding and finished that game. Refusing a game is seeing the guy who always brings 3 Riptides and saying no when he asks if you want to play.
Before coming to 40k i was playing competitively in another wargame, where pretty much everyone played competitively, optimising lists was the thing to do and knowledge of rules was expected. And so when I came to 40k I was kind of surprised by the amount of people that just played for fun, or new players still finding their place in the rules. But with every game like that even if I do get a bit competetive, I always try to also help the other player, keeping track of their triggers with them and talking with them about which stratagems they could use for example. Winning is awesome, but having a good time and making friends is much more awesome :)
In 40k it’s hard for most people to keep up with competitive lists because of how expensive it is and how much GW loves changing the rules regularly. It is far less of a financial burden to switch up your army to match the current meta in games like Warmachine or Infinity
Back in 8th i set up a casual game of 40k with my beginner level Eldar list. The opponent brought 3 yvarras with 40 drones. I regret not walking out, but I didn't know better back then :D
I don't think I'd refuse to play a certain list, or army, but there is an opponent I won't waste my time playing again for the usual reasons when it isn't fun to play. And I suppose something bringing a very jenky army might be questionable in non tournament setting. Unless they state before the game that they wanna try something or prep for a tournament. Anyway that's just me. I like to win, like anyone but I don't have to win, I enjoy a game where fun things happen or I learn a lot.
Dude if the opponent is being obnoxious and playing an unfun playstyle, don't just not play against them again. Just call it quits mid-game. Value your time my man.
@@GallantLee yeah obnoxious, with rude, cheating, arguing everything to boost them, not allowing take backs but taking them for themselves. Yeah, I'd be a million percent leaving buddy. I won't waste time on a bad opponent who isn't fun to chat to or have a game with.
I think if they pre warn well in advance they are bringing a comp list and is a good sport about it I could see myself giving it a go. But that heavily depends on the person at that point.
I actually did this myself, My very 3rd match ever, I told my opponent I'm still learning and would like a fun match. He played Tau vs my space marines and tabled me in 2 turns. I gave up by turn 3 and haven't played him since.
I would prolly have a serious thought about declining to play vs the Settlers of C'tan list featured yesterday >.> . When I was getting back into 40k I was thinking of going Chaos Knights, but I felt bad for the friends that would face that list so went Death Guard.
If people don't want to play against knights they need to build better lists. I cannot understand why people dislike playing against them, they're easy to predict, fewer models moving around so nowhere near as many surprises. It's worthwhile focusing something down to completion, and you can kill a few a turn with ease if your list is at all balanced.
as a necron player, just give them all a keyword 'shard of a star god', and limit them to 1-3, or whatever they feel is the right balance. I don't think individually they're undercosted, the problem is the ability to spam them
Sounds reasonable to me ... One or two at least "somewhat scary" models/squads should absolutely be expected. An entire army of them though -- not so much. You still might beat them and have a miserable game doing so.
Ctan used to be not just 0-1, but a Special Character, ie, you don't use them without prior agreement with the opponent. They wouldn't be in a typical all comes your dudes 1500 point list you took to play pickup games at a game store or club.
@@bigpoppa1234 fair, that sounds pretty shit to me - I think limiting to 2 would be perfect but that's my personal view, not necessarily a balanced one
@@ZaZi-Zeta01in aos is posible to play with only 4/5 heroes , which is absolutely aberrant. We have to stop thinking GW really wants to create a good and “realistic” core rules. They only try to shake “the meta” continuously to encourage competitive players to buy more and more . With no limits to almost anything because this way, people can buy more from everything .
List structures were more guardrails than protection against skew lists. In 5th edition, I ran a Chaos Spawn Skew army that had a Chaos Lord, a couple min-sized CSM units, and 30 Chaos Spawn. This was valid under the FOC rules at the time. 30 3W T5 units moving 14" a turn were next to impossible to beat, they were charging by turn 2 and had a ridiculous number of attacks.
Yeah they'll probably bring back some type of limitations to what you can take after the suckers have bought multiple of the models they were previously only allowed a limited number of. Sacrifice the game dynamic to make a quick buck, it's very much in line with GW's m.o. at this point.
We'll get that back after the suckers have bought multiple of the models they were previously only allowed a limited number of. It's very much in line with GW's m.o. to sacrifice the game dynamic in order to make a quick buck at this point.
We have a house rule at our club where if you think a new player is making a mistake with a move, shooting etc you say"are you sure" if they say they are, stop the game, explain why this would be a mistake, reset the models moved etc and start the turn again. it's a great way to keep people interested and a great way for a new player to not be tabled. we also have allocated players to play new players as they can be trusted not to power game.
Really good, but from my experience in games an opponent moving my pieces to show me what'd be a mistake rises my level of stress to 99%, even when I know they're gonna put them back exactly where they were
@@starhalv2427We don't move the models, the owner moves them. We understand folk don't like their models being handled. So we say move back to where you were 😊
At the end of the day it's entertainment. If an overpowered army gets refused against then use it for tournaments and don't bully people who don't want to deal with it.
Yeah, we can call it a "chart of the organization for forces" or "force org chart" for short. Maybe add a few instances that switch up the standard chart to represent themed special armies.
The only person you are damming is yourself. I don't think anyone argues that you owe the opponent the oppertunity, I think the point is consider the opportunity for yourself. Find fun and pleasure, not from winning, but from whatever the 40k game has to offer, in all of it's many weird ways
@@laugepoulsen8647 If the other guy is playing 6 C'tan or was playing a Wraithknight in a 500pt game back in the older days, nah you were just wasting your own time. Someone like that is there to Win At All Costs. Unless you find it fun to just try and avoid getting tabled on turn 2, you're better off not giving an unsporting player like that your time.
@@joshuabacker2363 I agree, it totally comes down to what kind of game I'm looking for. In most cases, it's very "win at all cost" but as long as you are on board for that, I see no issue. Whenever I play against someone outside og tournament settings, I ask them beforehand what kind of game they want, or atleast bringing two different list configurations. I feel like there's a bit of a conundrum with people not playing to win, but also being upset they have stacked odds against them. Either you care about winning or not. If I bring fluff against 6 shards, that's my unique scenario, and my personal Wincon is the underdog story of brave marines fighting a hopeless battle. How many of the novels, are kot about that exact scenario?
@@laugepoulsen8647 Idk what type of crowd you run with, but most people I've played against don't like win at all costs stuff at all and don't run lists that are meta. They usually run armies that they like for reasons unrelated to gameplay. Most people also just do not want to play a game where the goal is to lose slower. It doesn't really matter what the lore is, it's just not fun to watch the latest deathstar mulch half your army while you struggle to take off a few measly wounds. If someone does like that, sure. Nobody will object to stomping a willing opponent into the dirt. But if someone has the self respect to refuse that kind of game and instead play with those who have similar interests to themselves, then that's entirely normal and the right thing to do.
@@joshuabacker2363 Maybe it's just an outlook thing? I love playing non tryhard games aswell, whatever I fell like that day. I don't let other peoples way of enjoying the game get in my way of having fun. Unless you are cheating or being a dick, but then it has nothing to do with the game, but the opponent as a person. I don't necesarily see it, as just loosing slower, but I'm not interested in preaching a good way to play an uphill battle, it definitely can suck. *I* personally try and have a positive outlook, and look forward to the challenge, well aware it's not all peoples cup of tea, and it would be rude to bring meta list, into a crowd like the one you describe yours. I will never have a bad game, whether I losse (get stomped) or not, as long as me and my opponent can agree to the kind of game we would like to play. I don't think it's lack of self respect to accept the challenge. I don't want anyone to feel like they should take the challenge, especially if they don't want that, but calling someone else respectless for having a different outlook, doesn't help
Played against four ktan list this spring, with my orks. It was tough but not unbearable. Ktans was stucked in boyz piles, and ktans damage reducing ability was useless against buckets of 4/-1/1 attacks. But, neither ktans nor boyz couldn't kill each other. But ktans was out of play, and other units in my army was almost free to roam the table.
Had a player I thankfully avoided at a very small local RTT a couple weeks ago. He was running Magnus, 3 Mutaliths, and then a bunch of rubrics and sorcerers for Cabal points. All of it had been 3D printed the week prior to the point where some of his battleline were still shiny with resin, all his troops were missing heads and arms, and none of it was painted. Me and the other local player there both looked at each other and agreed that if we matched with him we were just going to drop and go home.
@@ianover6838 that depends entirely on if you brought medium fire power weapons. Ork buggies don't have great armor saves but do have decent toughness. Also it is a very very fast army. So if you don't screen your firepower you'll get swamped turn 1. When I played against speed freaks lists the big struggle is blocking them from charging your important units. They are orks so they are brutal in melee. However force them to chew through infantry for 2 turns and speed freaks get cleaned off the board fairly quickly. One thing to keep in mind as well is buggies and bikes actually have pretty powerful short range firepower. So watch out for the setting yourself up to get charged because your screen got shot off the board
This topic always reminds me of back in the days when I'd play Warmachine at my LGS... it was typically on Friday nights, so I'd head straight over to the store after finishing up a full work week, usually grabbing dinner on the way, and often would be feeling too drained or exhausted to play what might be a frustrating game. There were some players that I knew typically played skew lists, so if they were looking for a game when I turned up I'd often politely decline (especially if I knew my list couldn't handle the skew). But my rule of thumb was -- if I turned down a game, then I gave the person who offered first crack at the next person who showed up at the store. It meant that some nights I didn't get a game in, but I didn't really mind just hanging out, watching games and chatting with people. I'd rather have a fun social experience than go through the stress of a frustrating game.
Man, I remember some old Warmachine players took the "pLaY lIkE YoU'vE gOt A pAiR" from the first page of rules as a license to be a complete douchebag to other players.
When we played warmachine, our group always brought two lists for game night, one being comp the other being relax or silly. That way there wasn't any misunderstanding.
@Proto1Dude I always understood the rule of play like you got a pair is take risks and be confident in the hits you take and dish out in game. Sad that people were twats about it.
If there is one thing I have learned about this community. People playing with tournament optimised list outside of a tournament ALWAYS want games with people running casual lists.
As someone who likes to experiment with lists to optimize them for tournaments/ wants to practice beforehand to get better: No, no we do not. At least not all of us.
I booked a game with my local club on Facebook at the end of 8th edition. And I asked the fella casualy "What army are you brining? I can play SM Admech Guard Death Gurad Blood Angels." "I'm not telling ya!" was his response. Okay...massive red flag. He then brought Thousand Suns, Magnus and an Imperial Knight. I wasnt happy, tired to swap opponents, no one would. He called me "not man enough" I walked out and the club owner messaged me demanding I pay the £2.50 for the table rent. Even though I never took my mini out of the box. Since then I always share my list and will only play with my opponent if they have shared thiers. To me thats sportsmanship.
Yup, I always make sure I'm playing with a stranger that is also building a thematic list, or me and my friends will send each other a list at the same time. This is so there's no surprise optimization. Only time this is acceptable is when your opponent is bringing a very armour-heavy list, or a very horde-heavy list
there is nothing wrong with not telling your opponent what you play. Ive tried many times to have lists tailored against my tyranids and orks. I usually also play competitive though. If a new guy or a casual player want to play sure i can tell him. But i normally dont unless he asks. If i play my normal games at my local club where the environment is generally competitive, i would prefer not to share my army before we play.
The worst feeling is when you want to experiment and it's a complete counter to what your opponent has by complete coincidence. In 9th I had a 30 Warp Spider list with custom traits to optimise their killy potential and my opponent had Necron Warrior spam, 80% of his army was gone by turn 2.
The only time I ever encountered something like this was back in the Tau "Fish of Fury" days. There was a complete toolbag that came into the Chicago Battle Bunker and would only play against newbies and kids, trouncing them and basically being a complete jack@$$. After he was witnessed doing this a couple of times, the staff told him that he could only play against veteran players over 18 years of age. Jerk never came back. Good riddance.
I think this video kinda highlights the importance of building a community for Warhammer. If everybody knows each other, it's much easier to pair off for games with people looking for the same kind of game as you. The overwhelming reason somebody turns a game down in my local group is because they are looking for a stronger opponent to get ready for a tournament.
this was 14 years ago, my first league match i brought 2k points of orks. i ended up going against a deathwing terminator list, i had one model that could damage them, he killed it round one and insisted i kept playing even though no matter how high i rolled on the dice i couldn't even damage any of his models. i never went back to that league, it really made me not want to play for a while.
This seems like an extreme example BUT I think you were 100% justified in wanting to stop playing and surrender the match, if there’s literally nothing you could do why should the game continue? Even a real life army would almost always retreat in this situation
Why are people so hesitant to play against Deathwing armies? Terminators have all the standard problems which Space Marines have except to a more extreme extent. They'll roll dozens of 1s before the opponent runs out of dice to roll.
Only time i had someone refuse to play against me I was completely surprised. Dude brought a super fluffy pure tzeentch list and then started to complain that my IK list was unfair, that he didnt have any anti tank in his list and so on....... At that time i only owned an IK army, he knew that, everyone at the store knew it, like what did he expect me to bring?
Don’t waste your time on people like this. He would blame every list with from his perspective too many tanks as unfair. He could drown your knights in unkillable waves of horrors by the way
Yeah, while I understand the feeling about playing against knights (is more of a stat check game) , if I'm assembling a fluffy list I understand that failure to account for ways of dealing with armor is my own fault. Right now I'm working on a Kroot Hunting pack Army and I would like nothing but to use only Kroot units, but I'm aware that anything with high toughness would bowl me over. So I reached a compromise of including a couple of antitank/monster tau units just to round up the list.
@fenrismaav as someone also building Kroot, and as my first army, i worry more about elite horde armies like 80 space marines than ctan or knights lists, given kroot can basically get +500 pts of straight up super anti armor in hammerheads, broadsides and stormsurges. Turn most big things into scrap. But at least 50 tin cans that take too long to railgun and are too heavy for kroot hordes in their own detachment? Different story. I know the answer is actually krootox rampagers, but its another thing you have to look out for.
@@fenrismaav Doing the same with some Vespid too, I finally chose to bring the big guns for the tank part... I am planning to bring a T'aunar to the table ^^
I only play casually once in a while at the beer-and-pretzel style non-tournament. Last Saturday I player my fluffy Salamanders against mech ork which was great fun (how often do you see a Stompa on the table) and second game was against mech DG with a knight. We had a custom mission to get a Grot to the objective in the middle of the table and by the end of turn 2 I was pretty much tabled. So I just shook.my opponents hand and went for a beer, no harm no foul
In games as open as 40k, there's always going to be hard counters, mismatches and builds that are generally not fun to play. The easiest way to avoid that is to chat with your opponent beforehand. I would do this every time before playing 30k games. Sometimes, people just can't handle a Primarch, or Dreadnought spam, or whatever else. So many issues can be resolved quickly and easily just by talking.
That's a similar thing that my group fell into. I've accidentally brought "perfect counters" before and that's not particularly fun for anyone. Now we share lists well before the weekend on Google Drive and everyone is cool
I was in a virtual tournament a few months ago, back when C’Tan Spam was king. I go into it with mainly Jump Pack Blood Angels. A bit competitive, but easy to stay check. The first round was fine, but the last three were C’Tan Spam Necrons, back to back to back. When the last round was announced, I contacted the TO and ask to switch because I just would not walk into that again. Thankfully my last opponent dropped out, but the experience was absolutely miserable
I don't think it's accurate to compare Ctan Spam to other heavy-centric army builds, like Tyranid Monster Mash or Knights. Unless you're really building to a theme that prohibits it for some reason, every army should have the tools to deal with big high-toughness stuff and be able to give such a list a game. The issue with C'tan is that they take that list of units that are good against monsters etc and reduce it still further. Stuff like Vanquishers, Gladiator Lancers, melta units or even (ironically) Heavy Destroyers stand a very high chance of just bouncing off the invulnerable, and then even if they do get through the damage gets halved and then reduced by FNP. So to deal with Ctan you specifically need massed fire with either very high Strength or Lethal Hits + rerolls or crit boosts, and ideally low AP since it's irrelevant. Not every army has that available, and even those that do aren't always taking it. The damage reduction also makes a huge number of units that do 2 Damage massively inefficient because it just gets halved back down to 1. None of this is a massive issue if there's one of the things on the table, but when the opposing army is 6 of the things you've possibly just chucked several hundred points down the drain on units which are usually good but are now largely worthless. C'tan need to be a unique unit. You can't play multiple Primarchs, why on Earth should you be able to play multiple captive Star Gods?
Yeah, I don't take any issue with multiple Tyranid monsters, or idk, Knight army, those are quite expected from an army called IMPERIAL KNIGHTS. But multiple C'tan is a bit excessive both gameplay- and lore-wise
If you can't kill them, then just play around them. They're slow as hell, have low range shooting, and most of them are relatively easy to tar-pit with chaff or elites. The Transcendents are relatively tame if you screen well too, the best they can do is getting in position for a charge next turn, which gives you a turn to react. Just target the few point scorers in the list and once they're gone the C'tan are basically limited to sitting on Objectives or wasting their damage to score, which makes them vulnerable.
Gotta play it! If you lose, take note of what made you lose then you become a better player. I don’t like to turn down games either cause I rarely get to play so losing the match isn’t so much of a heavy loss as long as I had fun and found the play through to be fairly “cinematic” in nature.
As someone getting into the hobby, I didn't necessarily want an optimized army. It still has elements of an optimized list, but I excluded certain things from it. Been in here a bit talking about my TSon army, so I'll spare you a repeat. But I didn't want Magnus and I didn't want to rely on just Doombolt spam, as a decent sniper unit can neuter your whole strategy if they prioritize your sorcerers. However, I did build it to be relatively strong because I can only aford one army right now. Talked with a guy on reddit who was starting a Titan army and was catching flack for it. I admitted straight up that he'd probably whip my ass, but the fight would be good and the imaginative story playing out would look awesome.
I don’t get it. This edition doesn’t have anything you can argue that you won’t play. Flying circus, death balls, perma 2++ saves…that is the crap you say no to. Nothing in this edition resembles those old lists or edition of 40K.
Complete skew lists can be very unfun though. If you dont know you will face armour-spam. Or 6 ctans. And you brought a balanced list. Now if you KNOW tgen rhat 7s different
Just a reminder that Skari took a big fat dump on the 6 C'tan build with a Realspace Raiders drukhari army. Army builds matter but the player commanding it matters much more
I havent REFUSED a match, but I've definitely breathed a sigh of relief when my opponent isnt bringing spacemarines when I want to play my 7w teams hah
Yeah Astartes teams in 3rd have been pretty powerful in my experience. Giving them a faction wide double shoot and double attack was too much, especially the angels of death where the SNIPER has a double shoot.
when the kroot detachment dropped, told a mate i was really excited to try it out and that i would happily vs him with my full kroot list in a casual game. mate proceeds to bring full tank list with flamers to get around my stealth......
Ouch. If you encounter a list like that again, i got brutally traffic jammed a while back by a nearly-all-kroot army that won initiative and catapulted across no-mans land and trapped half my vehicles and several elite shooting in the DZ. might be worth trying that if your local scene uses decently dense terrain :D
Last time I played 40k competitively was in 3rd edition. From that perspective it's really fascinating to me that you list the multiple C'tan list as being actually acceptable in a tournament game. Back in the day you'd have got absolutely nuked on sportsmanship points for taking something that cheesy (we said beardy), which would cripple your result. Also, people wouldn't like you. The general feeling was that tabletop games always had loopholes and it was kind of on the players to not abuse them - and that went for both casual and competitive play. Of course, people would still push things at the margins (three Wraithlords for Eldar was popular), but they'd at least try and craft a lore justification on why they had that.
The problem with the Eldar Wraithlords (or Eldar Dreadnought, as they had been called in 2nd edition) was that unlike the Ork and Space marine Dreadnoughts, they had a Toughness valu, rather than an Armour value ... making them CONSIDERABLY harder to kill, while costing the same number of points! I hate Gav Thorpe to this very day!
Sorry, but in 3rd using a C`Tan was not "cheese", it was the surest way to loose for Necrons, due to the phaseout rule: when 3/4 of the models (not points, models counted!) with the Necron-rule where killed, your complete army phased out and you lost. C'Tan, Monolith and Pariah did not count as "Necron" for this purpose. So the more of this stuff you had, the faster the phaseout happend. So one usually simply ignored C`Tan (almost unkillable, but the damage output was not that high) an killed regular warriors until all the army disapeared...
@@Grubnar No, the problem wasn`t that it was to hard to kill. Technically you needed almost the same amount of Laskanons, Rockets, Melters etc. The Problem was the "shaken" rule. It was very easy to "shake" a vehicle, and than it was basically useless. Wraithlords had simply 3 LP and you had to remove all of these three to kill it, but until then the Lord was very reliable. and I you manged to get into CC almost nothing could kill him (almost no one used Power fists in that meta, because they sucked) It was more a point that the regular vehicle rules sucked and that the Wraithlord was the nly "working" Dreadnought, because he did not count as one... won`t blame Gavin, its the base rule that sucked....
Imagine you sit there for days and days trying to paint your army and pack all these models up for a game, just to arrive and he tells you "I don't play against that army, you can't paint" ... I can see how humanity can create another chaos god just off that..
Back in 8th Ed Warhammer Fantasy, much of the independent tournament scene would have a “Composition” element to your overall tournament score, which would usually count at least 25% of the total. Hyper-competitive builds taking advantage of all of the broken and massively OP elements would result in getting a very low score for composition, making it much harder to win 1st overall. It stopped most people from bringing broken-OP lists, since the kind of players who would take advantage of the list loopholes for max on-table power were the same ones who wanted a shot at the 1st Overall ranking, and tanking your comp score too much made getting 1st nearly impossible, no matter how well you did on the tabletop.
We've had a similar strategy on our tournaments. Basic army was 1850pts, but for lagging armies it was more, up to 2250 for Tomb Kings by the End Times. You also could get more points in your list for abandoning "meta" choices
Just force necrons to only be able to take one c'tan and it would be fine. C'tan should be a center piece unit, not filler. I hate that their balance to them will just be point increases which they will reach a point to where its not worth because outside of them being a kinda hard to kill beat stick. They don't support your army so you're taking them for the stats. I don't want them overcosted to where nobody will run them, but I don't want it to be where why would you take anything else other than them. Also necrons have a internal balance issue so there isn't alot of other options for them.
Or wouldn’t a command point penalty system around odd army selections be fantastic.. man I hate 10th edition for doing some things right but killing useful mechanics
I always include a legends datasheet (its usually a multimelta razorback) to character check my opponent, if they don't want to play, I probably didn't either.
In a casual setting i hate playing against the same list time and time again, It's the only time I've ever said I want to play against any of your other armies not the same deathguard list.
I remember when you only had a few thousand subs. and suddenly you are one of the biggest Warhammer channels, just top-tier insight and commentary on the hobby consistently. Well done man!
Go back to the old way of building armies, 2 HQ, 6 Troops and 3 of everything else. It made sense, it still makes sense and it removes shitty combos like this that are pure cheese and designed to be win at all cost
The old way also only worked when every faction was a cookie cutter mold with a different flavor of cookie. If I was FORCED to take 6 units of Khorne Berzerkers in 10th edition as a World Eaters player, I'd actually have more fun instantly surrendering at the start of the match instead of watching 1,060 points of models get blown off the board by any faction with slightly passable shooting.
@kamikazekalamari I didn't say that the old versions of the game didn't have cheese, but the game felt more fun. Army building felt more fun because you had to make choices. Most of my tanks are in heavy support, better choose what I want them to do, but that might lock me out of having dreadnoughts. Now, given enough points, I can take 3 of every tank and any dreadnoughts I want. As to the game being competitive focused, I don't like it and don't agree that it should be the games main focus. One of the first things the rulebook mentions is about having fun. For me, I think fun and casual play should come first, and competitive games should be secondary. I'd probably go as far as splitting the rules and points into 2 systems.
@OGXenos but you weren't forced to take 6 units of bezerkers in older editions. All you had to take was 1 HQ and 2 Troops, after that it was free game as to what you picked
This is why I lean very heavily into the "rule of cool". As long as what I have built/painted/fielded is what I enjoy, I do not mind too much about my opponents army. For a casual meet up, if the overall day is enjoyable and both players can laugh it all off then all is good. The challenge is when the opponent is one who has mathed out the meta and takes vocal joy out of stomping then they may not get a game next time.
look, If i'm just getting into your game, and one of my first gaming experiences with it is someone min-maxing to win every game, and using every rule to it's most "as written" stance possible. I'm probably never going to play again. think about that, Do you want to be the reason someone never plays your favorite tabletop wargame again? Do you want to be the reason someone has bad memories/experiences with the game? if you do. Keep rules lawyering and min-maxing your teams. but if you don't. Consider why you were playing like that in the first place. I stopped playing Star Wars Legion because the Community i was in started getting extremely toxic over tiny things, Like I hadn't played Legion in about 6 months, and While Playing with someone I got a rule regarding Vehicle Deployment wrong. However My opponent instead of kindly saying "Hey excuse me, you actually got deployment wrong, it's supposed to work like this..." Instead i got "You deployed your units wrong." without any explanation. and when asked for more detail "I thought you knew vehicles rules, as you're running two vehicles". himself forgetting the last time i played was half a year ago, so no shit i'm going to forget something. (For clarity, It was about the size of base that can be deployed on vehicles). So I just said "okay, we're not playing anymore. You made a choice to be a disrespectful asshole instead of kindly explaining how i got a rule wrong. I'm done playing with you. If you're looking for someone to blame for why you didn't get to play legion tonight? It's exclusively your fault, and your utterly disrespectful behavior towards me."
I like your opening point: I think the player is more important than the list- I can have fun being tabled in a game if my opponent is a fun dude and brings a good attitude. Meanwhile, a balanced list with an awful opponent...
I generally developed a rule against armies that ran 50% armor/monsters. Bonus points for epic heroes. However in 10th, it feels like every imperium list is running 70% of its point value in vehicles and epic heroes. I just want to mash some infantry into the opponents infantry and scrap for an objective, but vehicles in 10th with high toughness and free sponsons and main weapons just answer every situation, especially when an opponent runs 4-6 of them.
It becomes more of a stat check, if you happen to bring 50% of your army as anti vehicle units you basically gaurantee a win against those lists. I wouldn't blame any guard player for bringing lots of tanks though, as otherwise it would be even more obscenely expensive to build a playable army.
10th has been over for about a year-year and a half. No plan or support, just new kits from GW and FAQ’s that were written a year ago. 11th is around the corner. Just play Space Marine 2 or Darktide lol.
@@jacket2848 I play with what I have. Spending 200-300$ on anti tank options or doing the same to buy deep strike objective scorers isn't in my cards. Tank and knight lists have always been contentious, telling people to just "get better" is as much of a meme as "utilize your charge better" or saying "just roll higher" The issues are outside my zone of control unless I spend money or use psychic powers tot ell the future and know my opponent is going to bring an all tanks/knights list
Mordian Glory had a good example and discussion around this recently. Went to a tournament with an elite infantry heavy guard list and ended up matching against 3 Chaos Knight armies and after two rough skew matchups he opted out of the third.
This really is an issue of removing the force organization detachements. Arks of omen detachement was a funny and novel concept for the end of an edition but when I saw they made it the norm for 10th I was very worried, and I think I've been right to be.
Before even watching the video: I once refused to play my roommate if he ever puts his squad of Harlequins on the table. It was late 4th or early 5th edition and they would act according to night rules and could only be shot from less than 12 inches. My CSM could do basically nothing against them all game and it was quite frustrating. No fun to play against at all. If something is just NO fun to play against and only fun to play with because it literally bulldozes the competition then I don't want to waste my time with it.
@@isaacgraff8288 Depends on why you play. If play to compete, then he competition is the fun part. If you dont play to compete, then playing playing vs competitive is stupidly pointless. But you cant really complain if you show up to a competitive game, unprepared.
@@isaacgraff8288 The 'fun' in competition is finding out, amongst and against others of the same mindset, truly what is the strongest armies and strategies available to the current format. I accept the game itself is less fun inherently than playing casually, but then again, thats not why I'm here
@@renzbolado153 I think the "fun" is more in the constant meta chasing, if they really wanted to find out what was best they would get mad at GW for constantly updating the rules. The meta that develops changes so fast it can't help but be shallow. Games that have really cooked a long time tend to have much deeper meta (StarCraft Brood War is a great example from video games. It has a meta developed over decades and is still evolving).
@@Dram1984 yeah you know what, fair. While the point I described is still accurate for my perspective, meta-chasing is probably the more predominant mindset with the current circumstances, which I kinda hate ngl
My first experience with 40k was saying I'd be interrested in playing Tau since they look cool, the guy I talked to saying nobody would ever play with me 'cuz I'd just stand back and fire from distance doing nothing else the whole game, then backpedalled saying he's just joking.
Honestly I started to feel that way against most matchups. Every man and his dog plays competitive 40K these days. I’ve never denied a game based on faction/ list, but definitely against our local ‘that guy’
yeah i feel that, the game itself can be fun with/against most armies but the wrong person can ruin any game. i'd usually reject playing a person over rejecting an army.
I remember back in the start of 8th in our LGS we were playing the Plague Wars campaign and this guy brought something like 200 blue horrors and 6 daemon princes (3 from daemons, 3 from chaos space marines). He took 45 minutes to deploy and then every turn was just moving ahead the board 6in with the horrors in a line and the daemon princes behind, no dice rolling or anything, just 30-40 minutes of moving all the horrors. Once the 6(six) daemon princes got inevitably to melee he just wiped everything.
This is what is wrong with the tourney mindset dominating the hobby. Setting up lists just to be optimized rather than fun is just a toxic mindset for casual gamers, but its required for tourney players. We need to establish something for the casual players. Something that outlines for newer players the idea that a casual game is for fun and you can do what you want. Back in the day, we had to agree on what terrain gave cover saves. That sort of friendly collaboration is not built in the rules anymore.
@pablofernandez9366 uh, no. What I am asking for is just for people to change their hobby mindset to be more creative and less dogmatic when they play toy soldier games. 10th edition, ironically, has some of the most flexible rules for 40k in decades. It's not hard to just come up with your own missions and rules.
This existed all the way through 8th and 9th. It was Open Play, nd it was great. Unfortunately people mostly decided that Matched Play (and specifically tournament play at that) was the only way to play, to the point that many new people entering the hobby didn't realise there was any other way to play. Now, in 10th GW has just doubled down on that.
@@newhope33 I mean respect and fun does also work both ways and if your list is super meta/oppressive you can consider changing it to make it fun for your opponent too.
My time is more valuable than other peoples' fun. Every single last online multiplayer game is ruled by sweat lords who play the game like a job and force everyone else to go ham to compete or have 0 chance at winning. If I'm going to be forced to treat what should be a fun pass time as a job, then I'm simply going to walk away and do something better with my time. Because at that point, any expression in my own form of play is dead and buried and I'm instead simply fulfilling some predetermined set of criteria to "win".
@@frankfrankerson782 This. In my case I run a small business and can more or less work 24/7 if I wanted. My standard weekend rate is $125/hour plus I have a family, so please don't waste my time. I have much better things to do that keep up with the current "meta" and rules updates for some silly game. If that offends you I'm sorry but my time is mine and I will not allow you to waste it.
Maybe if you schedule a game with someone show up then refuse and do it to multiple people that could happen. If your LGS is hyper competitive then you find another location to play, which is what happened to me. We had a tournament player that was banned for cheating for a year from ITC, everyone that went up to the store was all about the competitive meta. As other people have said though, my time is worth something. I have limited hobby time an showing up for a game with someone who just want to see how fast his new broken list can table me is not a fun experience.
I once played a Dystopian Wars tournament where the winner was the best "player of wargames" rather than the best battlefield commander. (There was a best commander award but no one cared about it) Painting quality, Sportsmanship and Quality of Force Composition are all rated 1-5 points by your opponents. You also got 1-5 points from the games outcome (major lose to major victory). All points were tallied at the end of five rounds. It was by FAR the best tournament I'd ever played in. Despite only being 25% of the total score, winning or losing was still very important because almost everyone scored well in the other catagories. Suffice to say each and every game against each and every player was most excellent.
When I bring a real skew list (usualy a thematic) and dont know who Im playing I bring enough so that I can change it into a more balanced army but I would never drop out from a game that was decided in advance. I have this nightmare situation ones, I got to play about 1 game per week. And we set up a 2v2 total 4k on each side. After we had gone trough lists, set up the table and deployd and our oponents had done there first turn my teammate (who was realy salty after some realy bad dicerolls) decided that he was done and left. So with traveltime and preporation I had already spent most of the day and talked to the other two when my teammate had left, they playd a new game against eachother and I went home. So its not juts a comitment for you, its a comitment for your oponent as well and when you throw in the towel you might ruin his only game for the week/month as well. Key is to talk about it first.
I've had games where in the first turn I killed 2 models (infantry) and my opponent picked up 1/3 of my army due to dice rolls. We stopped discussed it, then reset the board and played again. The only time I get salty about dice rolls is I have one opponent that gets salty if he rolls average, his dice suck they don't roll right, it was a bad roll. I've had him roll 20 dice hitting on 3s hit with 18 and complain that he didn't get 6s, he rerolled the misses in to two more hits. Bad dice rolls happen, but complaining that your good dice rolls weren't better really gets to me. I started doing the numbers for his dice rolls when he complains, "that was above average or well above average".
If someone tables you twice during a demo game, maybe they need the win more than you, but I think if that's your demo it's okay to choose your own time over their fun. In a similar way if someone is at a local store and you are looking for a fun game nothing competitive and they bring "THAT" (whatever that maybe) it's okay to respect your time and say no thanks I am not interested in playing against that. Time is the currency of life be careful how you spend it
This is why I particularly enjoy Hoard Mode, the community co-op game mode designed by the Poorhammer Podcast. It allows up to 4 players to play The Game cooperatively and help each other out, while a 5th player gets to show off their massive collection and won't just curb stomp them since the AI has to act without player input. It's great for beginners who only have 500 points since it lets them playtest their factions before investing too much money into that faction.
When 5 knights first came out, I politely declined games. I typically bring extra to tailor the list to the strength of the enemy army. The game relies on the individuals to balance, games workshop cannot create a balanced game.
That C'Tan spam list we saw recently would piss me right off. Anyone who brings that to a casual game had better clear it with their opponent before they bring it because if I got surprised with that list at the table I would just pack up and leave.
This video speaks to me a lot. I’ve had quite a lot of games that have left a really sour taste in my mouth so I tend to have a pretty good idea of what I’m going to get into. I feel totally at odds with other players when I want to show up for games to hang out with a friend and make some cool cinematic and heroic moments. I don't at all consider myself as competitive, and that seems to mean ally games are losses and only half of them are even fun to play. All in all, this is a great video, thanks for talking about it!
whats sucks about ctan spam lists is theyre gonna end up nerfing ctan so its not even worth taking 1 of them instead of just limiting the number you can use so you cant use 6 anymore.
I had a situation like this just yesterday. I wanted to play a kind of derp Dread Mob list I threw together one night and hadn't been able to play yet. The guy that accepted the open invite for a game also chose his fun "meme" list. The problem with that list is that it was heavy tank Guard list he made to mostly mess with some of the local Knights players. Now, he did send me his list earlier that morning, but he sent it in a PDF that both my phone and laptop fought against opening and said PDF was in a super detailed competitive format, which my five minutes awake brain was not going to comprehend. He also tends to try and play a lot faster than I like to, so I feel pressured to move and do things faster than I would otherwise, which is bad when you're trying to play a detachment/list you're not used to. Also, he was still very under the impression that Orks still had access to a lot of their rules and abilities from older additions. Suffice to say that, while it was not a bad game, I would definitely not call it a fun game.
Knights are a fine army to play with or against. Opponents just get salty because they think the only way to win is killing things, which you can’t always guarantee against knights.
I've only recently started looking at 40k, but even in MTG we understand this concept. You don't bring a sliver deck unless you don't want to play, and if you bring an angels commander deck your odds of being refused are almost 90%. People want to have fun and experience the game, not just die helplessly with no real chance of fighting back. If you have a build that is super op (but not op enough for true competitive), then you find a friend who is willing to take turns playing punching bag with you so you can both play your builds.
I once went back to a town I knew a small and hardcore warhammer community resided in. They hadn't played a lot of 40k 10th, but many had played earlier edition, and had gone on to bloodball. A fellow from the club wanted a 10th edition game, and even though I normally favor the tactical and gameplay aspect, I had the foresight to think, that they might very well be new and unexperienced, so I prepared two lists. I told him in advance I would be playing death guard, so when I arrived, I asked what he was playing. He said he normally played necrons, but as he had heard I would bring death guard he swapped because "my necrons wouldn't have had a chance against your death guards, they are too tough" he said. I therefore thought, ohh this guy is maybe more knowledgeable about the game, or atleast cares enough about meta and tactics to counter pick me. I told him about my plans about two list, and picked the stronger one. That was a mistake There was many basic and core rules he didn't understand, and it felt bad having to correct him on things he though was possible, but wasn't throughout the game, and he was completely tabled after only destroying one rhino of mine. I tried to make the best out of the situation for his sake, but I really don't think either of us had a great game that day.
I've played 40k since 2nd ed, and through my many years, my main armies (BA and SW) have gone up and down in power; but I've never rejected a game even if it's one-sided from a balance point of view. Generally I care a lot more about who I'm playing against rather than what, and I'd take a fun/polite/positive person with the most broken list over a casual list piloted by a grumpy/negative person (or worse, a cheater). All tabletop games are ultimately a collaborative experience: talking it out before the game is definitely a good way of going about it for most people, but I sometimes feel the people who refuse games because of the "feels bad of being tabled too early" or not wanting to "waste time on a non-game" could also consider taking some degree of responsibility in their own list writing, to take something that won't get tabled too early and have regular non-games. This would only be an issue if your army is some sort of extremely skewed (but in the wrong direction) list of models that are really horrible in-game but you somehow love (e.g. a very lovingly converted army), in which case it really is a situation where the owner of this list has to probably find a group of like-minded individuals to play most of their games against (i.e. be less likely to do any sort of pick-up game against a random unknown player).
I have bad trypophobia and the only time I refused to play someone was when they kitbashed their nurgle army to be filled with these small holes everywhere that made me physically ill to look at.
@@jakubprzybylski6670 yes they did an excellent job with green stuff and subsequent highlighting and dry brushing. Every single raised cavity was accentuated 🤢.
Played in a 1000 pt. 40K tournament at my local game shop. Player showed up with a Aeldari Wraithknight with the S20 guns. He wound up winning the tournament, placed the knight in the back and just shot everything. Only person who might have had a chance was someone playing Imperial Knights. Player wasn't a jerk or anything just had a Death Star no one could kill.
I’ve never refused a game, but I’ve also only ever played against my friends or in a tournament setting where I didn’t want to just leave. And even when I have gone against some dumb lists, I’ve never played against a bad opponent. I remember one tournament I brought infantry-only eldar, and my opponent came with two Porphyrions and one other knight. I lost, but it was still fun cuz the opponent was a great guy.
We used to actively bully “win at all costs” try hards. Called them beardy, laughed at them and of course nobody would play with them because it wasn’t fun. “Sorry you wasted your money on 20 wolf guard Terminators with assault cannons, but nobody wants to play an a-hole” I miss those days.
11:28 Honestly this, in my group of friends we just talk about what we are going to take. you will have convos like: "Oh I am going to have a bunch of vehicles, so make sure you have at least 1 or 2 things that can deal with that" "Ok cool"
I never refused a game. Once I am in the room - it's on. I have lost many games vs different lists and never backed down. Yes - I may concede after 3 turns but never denied to play.
I think this is the best approach - never deny to play, and be happy to concede. Well... how about if you've played against them before, and this is outside of a tournament/competition setting, and in the past they have been obnoxious and you know it's a complete counter to your list. Do you still play them?
@@GallantLee where I live the community is on the small side and we are (I tend to think) pretty chill. We have try hard guys but that never has been an issue. Hard counter lists (in my eyes) are a challenge to be overcome. I don't care. Example - we had 2v2 games (2k point - 1k per player). One guy showed with Stormsurge and crisis suits vs my crusade squads. I still played even though turn 3 my army was almost completely destroyed but gave him a bloody nose and we won by points since I tied almost all shooters. :) So - as a Black Templars player - Accept Any Challenge, Not Matter the Odds! :D
Don't schedule a game against someone you don't want to play. If you go to a new location or are new to the game it is one thing, I have seen people who want to table new players "to show them how the game is played" it is a good way to get people to leave and not come back. Like you I will typically play a couple turns, but I keep track of the board state and concede when it becomes obvious I don't have a chance. As much as people like saying play it out, if I have to roll above average on every dice roll, hope my opponent rolls well below average and makes multiple mistakes I offer a hand shake and call it, I explain my reasoning and they normally agree.
I got into Warhammer because of Dawn of War 1 (I played T'au there) It was a joy to find out my favourite faction is hated by everyone after i picked up the models.
At the moment, for my World Eaters, it's going to be Guard. It was already one of our worst matchups, but now Berzerkers are entirely invalidated against them. The addition of Aquilons means that they can trap Rhinos, while preventing the Berzerkers inside from being able to disembark. And with Blood Surge getting gutted, they can just reliably shoot them off the board, since they have no chance of being a threat so long as they're 7.1+ inches away. Guard are also expected to be one of the top armies now anyways.
You don’t refuse matches in tournament play. You lose that match if you refuse to play. Casual play you can make up whatever silly rules you want even, “I don’t play against things I lose to.”
Yeah, I mean simply put, people need to TALK. If you’re getting a pickup game in - reach out to your opponent about the time you’re looking for. If they don’t respect it, then leave. It’s a hobby and free time is limited to most working folks.
![ลองสุ่มไอโฟน 990 โกงมั้ย? [ โกงมั้ยครับ ep.101 ] | DOM](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/bfsWe0j492k/mqdefault.jpg)
Just thought about that classic meme: "Me being escorted out of the Apocalypse game after showing up with 3000 gretchin models and nothing else"
Worth it.
Worth it.
Worth it.
Would it be the opponents or your own team that escort you out?,,, or both? :p
@@haraldbredsdorff2699the first responders
Some poor sod at my local shop wanted to try out imperial agents for fun, got the codex, and his first game ran directly into 3 c'tan run by a sweaty rules lawyer. He looked downright miserable
Agent vs C'tan... that's just massacre...🤦🏻♂️
These players who think its fun to crush the newbie are the worst. They seem to be compensating for some inadequacy. I have seem this scenario many times of the years, and the Hobby loses that new player. I don''t throw games with newbies, but try to help them learn to use their army. Usually by telling them "that unit has two choices and giving them the pro and cons, then letting them pick"
People like that sweaty rules lawyer are never beating the allegations 😂
That's just so sad. I agree with what the other commentator said. I have also seen A pro trying to crush a newbie in so many different games. It usually just ends up driving them off but in the same psychology that turns people into whales for mobile games these people can't help it but try and inflate their egos
I'm the rules lawyer that tells the good stuff and the bad stuff, for example I'll point out that their model has a FNP, or I'll remind them to chose an oath of moment.
Refusing to play against 6 C'tan is the sensible thing to do tbh
Why have GW allowed a game system where 6 ctan can be played on a table.
Agreed and I play necrons xd
I’ve played a necron mirror match at 1K points where my opponent brought a monolith and a night bringer (pre pariah nexus)
That was the only time I’ve refused a match
@@aleczandergordon1298 Same reason why knight armies are a thing
kinda like playing against IK
Skari took down a 6 C'tan list in his recent 6-0 GT win
look, if i play against someone who knows me and i show up with a fluffy imperial guard list just to face the most broken, tailored against my army list list. i refused to play against that.
You’d also probably need to consider getting new friends.
I don’t even see how someone can have fun with that? Part of the fun is building an army list that can deal with multiple threats. Then responding to your opponent on the fly is where the fun comes from.
Playing against a friend who you know brings a lot of infantry, then just rearranging your list to be nothing but anti-infantry. Is super boring. Oh, you win, congrats. Do you also go to the park to dunk on some 10 year olds playing basketball?
fair, but thats just an asshole move in general, even in my pretty competetive play group (even our fluffy players try to build the fluff they want in the best way possible) that would be a no go.
I still remember a complete artillery battery of Imperial Guard set up by my opponent after they knew I would field my World Eaters. The Berzerkers were torn to pieces and Khorne was very displeased that day.
Following my army line of thought, I felt very angry as well.
@brainyskeletonofdoom7824 i agree skew lists suck everybody was "i don't like having to take troops to play a game. I'm getting taxed" you should be. You are planning a skew list. Skew tax.
To borrow some MTG terminology, there has to be a 'rule zero' conversation before turning up for a game. If both players want a gloves-off, no holds barred competitive match, fine, go for it. But if someone is playing fluffy chapter-accurate imperial fists and the other guys rocks up with 6 Ctan or statcheck daemons, the game is a non-starter. Those lists have their place, but both players need to agree
Question : will you consider a 8 Kastelan Robots+Rex list, who runs Cohort Cybernetica is fluffy🥹
I run a bunch of blood thirsters and unclean ones when the opportunity arises. Skarbrand being one of my favorite painted models.
Id still play them if they were dog 💩 I just love painting them.
But most of my lists are thematic rather than competitive. My WE list only exists to move as fast as possible, kill as fast as possible and die as fast as possible.
@@FormerGovernmentHuman right there with you, I play Daemons and usually run Skarbrand, Thirster, GUO and LoC, rules be damned the models are ace. They happen to be pretty strong right now, I was more talking about the 6 GD lists you see floating around - as Auspex says here it's not actually that good of a list competitively but it will create non-games because of how skewed it is
Then: Me, playing 9th edition T'au with lots of fire warriors because that was what my parents kept buying for me for christmas in high school when I kept telling them I needed crisis suits and now having no money thanks to working as a package courier vs. space marine players running hyper-optimized tournament lists they 3D-printed last weekend with their paycheck from their job that they got through knowing people at the company.
Now: Me, playing 10th edition T'au with the same exact list only now I can't even get up to 1500 points now vs. dreadnoughts wiping the board turn 2 every. Fucking. Time.
If someone turns up with 6 C'Tan and I don't have my knights out, it's just a fucking stupid idea to try to play that.
knights out lights out
I attempted with 2avatars as eldar. It was a hard battle, at least 2 dead C'tans
Knights?
Can knights even win against 3000 points of ctan?
@@FormerGovernmentHumanWar Dog pack. We'll make it work
Bringing your fresh out-of-the-box Combat Patrol to the table and your opponent unloads a home-printed full scale Warlord Titan from their car and you think "Bet."
That game should never get off the ground. A combat patrol is roughly 500 points at most, a Warlord is 3500...
*Parry this, you fucking casual*
@@thomasyokum1070 7 people vs 1 titan. But who goes first? hahaha
Someone did this to me with a forgeworld titan when I first started playing in 8th, I sold those models and didn’t want to play again for a while because it just wasn’t fun when that was the vibe that store encouraged
3d printed ain't allowed so put that bad boy back in the car :D
I remember a few editions ago someone refused to play me just because I was GSC with a patriarch and he'd heard about a convoluted combo for Mental Onslaught that could one shot a warlord titan.
I tried explaining that 1) that required absurd levels of synergy that isnt realistic to pull off and 2) He wasnt playing titans and most units in his list could be turn 1 killed by most factions.
The meme/echo chamber talk definitely has an impact.
My buddies banned my Eldar because the faction's 'Metawatch' win-rate was too high even though I didn't own a single model that was being used in the 'Combos'. I was running Guardians, Rangers and Striking Scorpions, for God's sake...
@@GreyHunter88 Are you kidding me? Almost all the meta lists relied on wraithguard, wraithknights or windriders spam to even work!
@@Cirac1 I know, but the internet was all parroting the line that "Eldar are overpowered". I played one game with my Eldar, beat my buddy pretty solidly, and they're all like "Yea, this is just proof. Eldar are just way too overpowered. You gotta play something else."
It was that echo chamber thing you described, where they went into that game expecting the Eldar to be overpowered, and my luck and/or good play only confirmed that bias. My friends were serious enough about 40k to hear that Eldar were winning everything, but casual enough that they didn't know what those lists were actually comprised of. -_-
That's why I dislike how Metawatch presents faction win-rates as a blanket statistic. We'll see that Beasts of Chaos are doing way better all of a sudden, but meanwhile that's only one particular fringe list using 12 of a model I don't have, for example.
Good god do I feel this one ;-;
@@GreyHunter88 Can't save dumb, people from being dumb. The group I play with has a few try harders in it, but we are all friends and all want to have fun, When I play the try-harder I say ok, today we can try-hard bring your skew list, and other times I will say, ok lets play something more balanced. And against the weaker players, I will take worse stuff, or suggest ways they can deal with my stuff.
I want a close game, Winning doesn't matter to me just making it close.
I saw the thumbnail with 4 C'tans and instantly started throwing up and screaming in horror. Thanks, Auspex Tactics! Nothing like terror-induced flashbacks to start the day!
throwing up from fear-induced stress sounds like a valid reason to call out of work at least
really makes you feel like a necron (the c'tan are oppressing our people)
That 6 ctan army is actually pretty easy to beat.
@@Lothrean it went 6 and 0
Oh hi Paul!
I’ve only ever refused one game, there had been a miscommunication. I turned up with a 1K points army only to question the number of units my opponent was deploying, to find he was expecting a 2K game. He kindly reworked his list to match mine.
Other than that I like the challenge and chance for a glorious last stand - yes I play guard mainly.
but you didn't even refuse the game, you corrected a misunderstanding and finished that game. Refusing a game is seeing the guy who always brings 3 Riptides and saying no when he asks if you want to play.
id say 1k points of Guard going against 2k points of enemies is just lore accurate 😂 what kind of guard army are u running?
My worst miscommunication was when I turned up for a pre-arranged game of Chaos V *Empire* and my opponent was expecting Chaos V *Imperial*.
@@DanielPhillips990Lmao! Archaeon the Everchosen charging a gun line of guard, that I would like to see
Before coming to 40k i was playing competitively in another wargame, where pretty much everyone played competitively, optimising lists was the thing to do and knowledge of rules was expected.
And so when I came to 40k I was kind of surprised by the amount of people that just played for fun, or new players still finding their place in the rules. But with every game like that even if I do get a bit competetive, I always try to also help the other player, keeping track of their triggers with them and talking with them about which stratagems they could use for example. Winning is awesome, but having a good time and making friends is much more awesome :)
For a long time the game was only 'for fun'. So no surprise to come across that. Those halcyon pre internet days!
"for fun" can not really be labeled since it can not be defined.
In 40k it’s hard for most people to keep up with competitive lists because of how expensive it is and how much GW loves changing the rules regularly. It is far less of a financial burden to switch up your army to match the current meta in games like Warmachine or Infinity
Sir you are the true John Warhammer
Back in 8th i set up a casual game of 40k with my beginner level Eldar list. The opponent brought 3 yvarras with 40 drones. I regret not walking out, but I didn't know better back then :D
What is "yvarras" ??
Drones implies Tau, right?
Correct @@Grubnar
@@Grubnar i believe yvarras are the forge world alt riptide
@@Grubnarthey are a Riptide variant that was sent to legends.
@@Pajamas.Tepanek Ah, I had no idea. Thank you!
I don't think I'd refuse to play a certain list, or army, but there is an opponent I won't waste my time playing again for the usual reasons when it isn't fun to play. And I suppose something bringing a very jenky army might be questionable in non tournament setting. Unless they state before the game that they wanna try something or prep for a tournament. Anyway that's just me. I like to win, like anyone but I don't have to win, I enjoy a game where fun things happen or I learn a lot.
Dude if the opponent is being obnoxious and playing an unfun playstyle, don't just not play against them again. Just call it quits mid-game. Value your time my man.
@@GallantLee yeah obnoxious, with rude, cheating, arguing everything to boost them, not allowing take backs but taking them for themselves. Yeah, I'd be a million percent leaving buddy. I won't waste time on a bad opponent who isn't fun to chat to or have a game with.
Fuck off with your sensible take and nuanced opinion
I think if they pre warn well in advance they are bringing a comp list and is a good sport about it I could see myself giving it a go.
But that heavily depends on the person at that point.
I actually did this myself, My very 3rd match ever, I told my opponent I'm still learning and would like a fun match. He played Tau vs my space marines and tabled me in 2 turns. I gave up by turn 3 and haven't played him since.
I would prolly have a serious thought about declining to play vs the Settlers of C'tan list featured yesterday >.> . When I was getting back into 40k I was thinking of going Chaos Knights, but I felt bad for the friends that would face that list so went Death Guard.
DEATH GUARD YYYYYYYYYYYEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHH
Could always ally in a single knight, as a treat
@@davetorres1893 That is reasonable. Knights games are just different.
+1 for Settlers of C'tan -- love that phrase.
If people don't want to play against knights they need to build better lists. I cannot understand why people dislike playing against them, they're easy to predict, fewer models moving around so nowhere near as many surprises. It's worthwhile focusing something down to completion, and you can kill a few a turn with ease if your list is at all balanced.
as a necron player, just give them all a keyword 'shard of a star god', and limit them to 1-3, or whatever they feel is the right balance. I don't think individually they're undercosted, the problem is the ability to spam them
2 i suppose because eldar has 2
Sounds reasonable to me ... One or two at least "somewhat scary" models/squads should absolutely be expected. An entire army of them though -- not so much. You still might beat them and have a miserable game doing so.
Ctan used to be not just 0-1, but a Special Character, ie, you don't use them without prior agreement with the opponent. They wouldn't be in a typical all comes your dudes 1500 point list you took to play pickup games at a game store or club.
@@bigpoppa1234 fair, that sounds pretty shit to me - I think limiting to 2 would be perfect but that's my personal view, not necessarily a balanced one
I love the old list structure rules, where there was a limit on minimum battle line troops and a maximum on heavy support or elite troops.
I come from AoS, where that's still a think - it very much threw me off that such isn't a thing in current 40k
@@ZaZi-Zeta01in aos is posible to play with only 4/5 heroes , which is absolutely aberrant. We have to stop thinking GW really wants to create a good and “realistic” core rules. They only try to shake “the meta” continuously to encourage competitive players to buy more and more . With no limits to almost anything because this way, people can buy more from everything .
List structures were more guardrails than protection against skew lists. In 5th edition, I ran a Chaos Spawn Skew army that had a Chaos Lord, a couple min-sized CSM units, and 30 Chaos Spawn. This was valid under the FOC rules at the time. 30 3W T5 units moving 14" a turn were next to impossible to beat, they were charging by turn 2 and had a ridiculous number of attacks.
Yeah they'll probably bring back some type of limitations to what you can take after the suckers have bought multiple of the models they were previously only allowed a limited number of. Sacrifice the game dynamic to make a quick buck, it's very much in line with GW's m.o. at this point.
@@ZaZi-Zeta01 used to be, got axed for being "too complicated"
Man, what we need is some sort of, I dunno, _force organisation chart_ that limits how many of certain unit types people take in a game...
We'll get that back after the suckers have bought multiple of the models they were previously only allowed a limited number of. It's very much in line with GW's m.o. to sacrifice the game dynamic in order to make a quick buck at this point.
More like give Epic Heroes keywords to units that weren't intended to be used as a spammable unit...
Another one who wants force organisations chart back
it woulnt change much....i remember the old death star lists
@@MrFiremagnetwhat are you on about, epic heroes are a single selection. You can't take more than 1.
We have a house rule at our club where if you think a new player is making a mistake with a move, shooting etc you say"are you sure" if they say they are, stop the game, explain why this would be a mistake, reset the models moved etc and start the turn again. it's a great way to keep people interested and a great way for a new player to not be tabled. we also have allocated players to play new players as they can be trusted not to power game.
Really good, but from my experience in games an opponent moving my pieces to show me what'd be a mistake rises my level of stress to 99%, even when I know they're gonna put them back exactly where they were
@@starhalv2427We don't move the models, the owner moves them. We understand folk don't like their models being handled. So we say move back to where you were 😊
@@mcc_1024
Good, good, I'm happy with that
At the end of the day it's entertainment. If an overpowered army gets refused against then use it for tournaments and don't bully people who don't want to deal with it.
This is why army comp needs to be more than what it is. Armies should look like armies, not just a random collection of spammed models
Yep, and bring back limits on named characters. I think 1 Epic Hero per army is a good starting point.
Yeah, we can call it a "chart of the organization for forces" or "force org chart" for short. Maybe add a few instances that switch up the standard chart to represent themed special armies.
@@matthewsmyth9939 YO this guy's onto something!! G-dubs should listen!!11
Bring back Force Org charts (but have Battleline vary depending on Detachment)
Or they could just raise the points and call it a day 🤷♂️ Force charts are ass, limits way too much imo
It doesn't help when some of the detachments actively encourage skew lists rather than promoting building diverse army lists!
A 40K game takes a long time. Nobody owes you their time. Simple as.
The only person you are damming is yourself. I don't think anyone argues that you owe the opponent the oppertunity, I think the point is consider the opportunity for yourself. Find fun and pleasure, not from winning, but from whatever the 40k game has to offer, in all of it's many weird ways
@@laugepoulsen8647 If the other guy is playing 6 C'tan or was playing a Wraithknight in a 500pt game back in the older days, nah you were just wasting your own time.
Someone like that is there to Win At All Costs. Unless you find it fun to just try and avoid getting tabled on turn 2, you're better off not giving an unsporting player like that your time.
@@joshuabacker2363 I agree, it totally comes down to what kind of game I'm looking for. In most cases, it's very "win at all cost" but as long as you are on board for that, I see no issue. Whenever I play against someone outside og tournament settings, I ask them beforehand what kind of game they want, or atleast bringing two different list configurations.
I feel like there's a bit of a conundrum with people not playing to win, but also being upset they have stacked odds against them. Either you care about winning or not. If I bring fluff against 6 shards, that's my unique scenario, and my personal Wincon is the underdog story of brave marines fighting a hopeless battle. How many of the novels, are kot about that exact scenario?
@@laugepoulsen8647 Idk what type of crowd you run with, but most people I've played against don't like win at all costs stuff at all and don't run lists that are meta. They usually run armies that they like for reasons unrelated to gameplay.
Most people also just do not want to play a game where the goal is to lose slower. It doesn't really matter what the lore is, it's just not fun to watch the latest deathstar mulch half your army while you struggle to take off a few measly wounds.
If someone does like that, sure. Nobody will object to stomping a willing opponent into the dirt. But if someone has the self respect to refuse that kind of game and instead play with those who have similar interests to themselves, then that's entirely normal and the right thing to do.
@@joshuabacker2363 Maybe it's just an outlook thing?
I love playing non tryhard games aswell, whatever I fell like that day. I don't let other peoples way of enjoying the game get in my way of having fun. Unless you are cheating or being a dick, but then it has nothing to do with the game, but the opponent as a person.
I don't necesarily see it, as just loosing slower, but I'm not interested in preaching a good way to play an uphill battle, it definitely can suck. *I* personally try and have a positive outlook, and look forward to the challenge, well aware it's not all peoples cup of tea, and it would be rude to bring meta list, into a crowd like the one you describe yours.
I will never have a bad game, whether I losse (get stomped) or not, as long as me and my opponent can agree to the kind of game we would like to play. I don't think it's lack of self respect to accept the challenge. I don't want anyone to feel like they should take the challenge, especially if they don't want that, but calling someone else respectless for having a different outlook, doesn't help
Played against four ktan list this spring, with my orks. It was tough but not unbearable. Ktans was stucked in boyz piles, and ktans damage reducing ability was useless against buckets of 4/-1/1 attacks. But, neither ktans nor boyz couldn't kill each other. But ktans was out of play, and other units in my army was almost free to roam the table.
And da Boyz had fun
@@AncientIrishCelt "The object of the game is to win. The purpose of the game is to have fun. Do not confuse the two!"
@@AncientIrishCelt 'MEMBER WHEN WE SPENT DAYZ JUST BASHIN' ON DOSE FOUR BIG SHINY GITS? WHAT A 'OLIDAY.
Reminds me back when rule of 3 wasn’t a thing in 40k so people were bringing 9 Ork buggies, or 7 Hive Tyrants and you just have to deal with it
Had a player I thankfully avoided at a very small local RTT a couple weeks ago. He was running Magnus, 3 Mutaliths, and then a bunch of rubrics and sorcerers for Cabal points. All of it had been 3D printed the week prior to the point where some of his battleline were still shiny with resin, all his troops were missing heads and arms, and none of it was painted. Me and the other local player there both looked at each other and agreed that if we matched with him we were just going to drop and go home.
If it’s still shiny with resin he don’t clean it properly so he can’t even 3d print properly
@fishyboy2140
bros going to get resin poisoning 💀
Yeah extreme skew lists give me a real ''seal clubber'' vibe in casual settings.
But Ork speed freaks are SO FUN! showing up with 8 buggies and 24 bikes is the most fun I've ever had with orks
@@Douglas-nt7jd Genuine question: how is it to play against that?
@@ianover6838 that depends entirely on if you brought medium fire power weapons. Ork buggies don't have great armor saves but do have decent toughness. Also it is a very very fast army. So if you don't screen your firepower you'll get swamped turn 1.
When I played against speed freaks lists the big struggle is blocking them from charging your important units. They are orks so they are brutal in melee. However force them to chew through infantry for 2 turns and speed freaks get cleaned off the board fairly quickly. One thing to keep in mind as well is buggies and bikes actually have pretty powerful short range firepower. So watch out for the setting yourself up to get charged because your screen got shot off the board
This topic always reminds me of back in the days when I'd play Warmachine at my LGS... it was typically on Friday nights, so I'd head straight over to the store after finishing up a full work week, usually grabbing dinner on the way, and often would be feeling too drained or exhausted to play what might be a frustrating game. There were some players that I knew typically played skew lists, so if they were looking for a game when I turned up I'd often politely decline (especially if I knew my list couldn't handle the skew). But my rule of thumb was -- if I turned down a game, then I gave the person who offered first crack at the next person who showed up at the store. It meant that some nights I didn't get a game in, but I didn't really mind just hanging out, watching games and chatting with people. I'd rather have a fun social experience than go through the stress of a frustrating game.
Man, I remember some old Warmachine players took the "pLaY lIkE YoU'vE gOt A pAiR" from the first page of rules as a license to be a complete douchebag to other players.
When we played warmachine, our group always brought two lists for game night, one being comp the other being relax or silly. That way there wasn't any misunderstanding.
@Proto1Dude I always understood the rule of play like you got a pair is take risks and be confident in the hits you take and dish out in game. Sad that people were twats about it.
If there is one thing I have learned about this community. People playing with tournament optimised list outside of a tournament ALWAYS want games with people running casual lists.
As someone who likes to experiment with lists to optimize them for tournaments/ wants to practice beforehand to get better: No, no we do not. At least not all of us.
I booked a game with my local club on Facebook at the end of 8th edition. And I asked the fella casualy "What army are you brining? I can play SM Admech Guard Death Gurad Blood Angels." "I'm not telling ya!" was his response. Okay...massive red flag. He then brought Thousand Suns, Magnus and an Imperial Knight. I wasnt happy, tired to swap opponents, no one would. He called me "not man enough" I walked out and the club owner messaged me demanding I pay the £2.50 for the table rent. Even though I never took my mini out of the box.
Since then I always share my list and will only play with my opponent if they have shared thiers. To me thats sportsmanship.
I used to refuse to tell my opponent what I was playing until we started to deploy, to avoid last minute optimizing by my opponent. 🤷
I prefer not telling your opponent, although I'll tell them I use imperium force🙈
But I agree with you, that opponent is just not nice at all🙄
I don't ever share lists, but everyone at my LGS knows I'm the T'au guy and will usually at least say what faction they're bringing so it works out.
Yup, I always make sure I'm playing with a stranger that is also building a thematic list, or me and my friends will send each other a list at the same time. This is so there's no surprise optimization. Only time this is acceptable is when your opponent is bringing a very armour-heavy list, or a very horde-heavy list
there is nothing wrong with not telling your opponent what you play. Ive tried many times to have lists tailored against my tyranids and orks. I usually also play competitive though. If a new guy or a casual player want to play sure i can tell him. But i normally dont unless he asks. If i play my normal games at my local club where the environment is generally competitive, i would prefer not to share my army before we play.
The worst feeling is when you want to experiment and it's a complete counter to what your opponent has by complete coincidence.
In 9th I had a 30 Warp Spider list with custom traits to optimise their killy potential and my opponent had Necron Warrior spam, 80% of his army was gone by turn 2.
The only time I ever encountered something like this was back in the Tau "Fish of Fury" days.
There was a complete toolbag that came into the Chicago Battle Bunker and would only play against newbies and kids, trouncing them and basically being a complete jack@$$. After he was witnessed doing this a couple of times, the staff told him that he could only play against veteran players over 18 years of age.
Jerk never came back. Good riddance.
I think this video kinda highlights the importance of building a community for Warhammer. If everybody knows each other, it's much easier to pair off for games with people looking for the same kind of game as you. The overwhelming reason somebody turns a game down in my local group is because they are looking for a stronger opponent to get ready for a tournament.
this was 14 years ago, my first league match i brought 2k points of orks. i ended up going against a deathwing terminator list, i had one model that could damage them, he killed it round one and insisted i kept playing even though no matter how high i rolled on the dice i couldn't even damage any of his models. i never went back to that league, it really made me not want to play for a while.
This seems like an extreme example BUT I think you were 100% justified in wanting to stop playing and surrender the match, if there’s literally nothing you could do why should the game continue? Even a real life army would almost always retreat in this situation
Why are people so hesitant to play against Deathwing armies?
Terminators have all the standard problems which Space Marines have except to a more extreme extent.
They'll roll dozens of 1s before the opponent runs out of dice to roll.
Only time i had someone refuse to play against me I was completely surprised. Dude brought a super fluffy pure tzeentch list and then started to complain that my IK list was unfair, that he didnt have any anti tank in his list and so on....... At that time i only owned an IK army, he knew that, everyone at the store knew it, like what did he expect me to bring?
Don’t waste your time on people like this. He would blame every list with from his perspective too many tanks as unfair. He could drown your knights in unkillable waves of horrors by the way
Yeah, while I understand the feeling about playing against knights (is more of a stat check game) , if I'm assembling a fluffy list I understand that failure to account for ways of dealing with armor is my own fault.
Right now I'm working on a Kroot Hunting pack Army and I would like nothing but to use only Kroot units, but I'm aware that anything with high toughness would bowl me over. So I reached a compromise of including a couple of antitank/monster tau units just to round up the list.
@fenrismaav as someone also building Kroot, and as my first army, i worry more about elite horde armies like 80 space marines than ctan or knights lists, given kroot can basically get +500 pts of straight up super anti armor in hammerheads, broadsides and stormsurges. Turn most big things into scrap. But at least 50 tin cans that take too long to railgun and are too heavy for kroot hordes in their own detachment? Different story. I know the answer is actually krootox rampagers, but its another thing you have to look out for.
@@fenrismaav Doing the same with some Vespid too, I finally chose to bring the big guns for the tank part... I am planning to bring a T'aunar to the table ^^
Buys knights, people refuse to play with you, surprised pikachu face
I only play casually once in a while at the beer-and-pretzel style non-tournament. Last Saturday I player my fluffy Salamanders against mech ork which was great fun (how often do you see a Stompa on the table) and second game was against mech DG with a knight. We had a custom mission to get a Grot to the objective in the middle of the table and by the end of turn 2 I was pretty much tabled. So I just shook.my opponents hand and went for a beer, no harm no foul
In games as open as 40k, there's always going to be hard counters, mismatches and builds that are generally not fun to play.
The easiest way to avoid that is to chat with your opponent beforehand. I would do this every time before playing 30k games. Sometimes, people just can't handle a Primarch, or Dreadnought spam, or whatever else. So many issues can be resolved quickly and easily just by talking.
That's a similar thing that my group fell into. I've accidentally brought "perfect counters" before and that's not particularly fun for anyone. Now we share lists well before the weekend on Google Drive and everyone is cool
I was in a virtual tournament a few months ago, back when C’Tan Spam was king. I go into it with mainly Jump Pack Blood Angels. A bit competitive, but easy to stay check. The first round was fine, but the last three were C’Tan Spam Necrons, back to back to back. When the last round was announced, I contacted the TO and ask to switch because I just would not walk into that again. Thankfully my last opponent dropped out, but the experience was absolutely miserable
I don't think it's accurate to compare Ctan Spam to other heavy-centric army builds, like Tyranid Monster Mash or Knights. Unless you're really building to a theme that prohibits it for some reason, every army should have the tools to deal with big high-toughness stuff and be able to give such a list a game. The issue with C'tan is that they take that list of units that are good against monsters etc and reduce it still further. Stuff like Vanquishers, Gladiator Lancers, melta units or even (ironically) Heavy Destroyers stand a very high chance of just bouncing off the invulnerable, and then even if they do get through the damage gets halved and then reduced by FNP. So to deal with Ctan you specifically need massed fire with either very high Strength or Lethal Hits + rerolls or crit boosts, and ideally low AP since it's irrelevant. Not every army has that available, and even those that do aren't always taking it. The damage reduction also makes a huge number of units that do 2 Damage massively inefficient because it just gets halved back down to 1. None of this is a massive issue if there's one of the things on the table, but when the opposing army is 6 of the things you've possibly just chucked several hundred points down the drain on units which are usually good but are now largely worthless.
C'tan need to be a unique unit. You can't play multiple Primarchs, why on Earth should you be able to play multiple captive Star Gods?
Yeah, I don't take any issue with multiple Tyranid monsters, or idk, Knight army, those are quite expected from an army called IMPERIAL KNIGHTS.
But multiple C'tan is a bit excessive both gameplay- and lore-wise
Mass melta can destroy C'tans but that is difficult
Should be at least avatar treatment for eldar
@@henrymng*can* until it just hits all the 4+ invuns and your unit dies for no reason :/
If you can't kill them, then just play around them. They're slow as hell, have low range shooting, and most of them are relatively easy to tar-pit with chaff or elites. The Transcendents are relatively tame if you screen well too, the best they can do is getting in position for a charge next turn, which gives you a turn to react.
Just target the few point scorers in the list and once they're gone the C'tan are basically limited to sitting on Objectives or wasting their damage to score, which makes them vulnerable.
I have had moments where I knew chances was high I was gonna lose. But I have not refused a match ever.
Gotta play it! If you lose, take note of what made you lose then you become a better player. I don’t like to turn down games either cause I rarely get to play so losing the match isn’t so much of a heavy loss as long as I had fun and found the play through to be fairly “cinematic” in nature.
As someone getting into the hobby, I didn't necessarily want an optimized army. It still has elements of an optimized list, but I excluded certain things from it. Been in here a bit talking about my TSon army, so I'll spare you a repeat. But I didn't want Magnus and I didn't want to rely on just Doombolt spam, as a decent sniper unit can neuter your whole strategy if they prioritize your sorcerers. However, I did build it to be relatively strong because I can only aford one army right now. Talked with a guy on reddit who was starting a Titan army and was catching flack for it. I admitted straight up that he'd probably whip my ass, but the fight would be good and the imaginative story playing out would look awesome.
I don’t get it. This edition doesn’t have anything you can argue that you won’t play. Flying circus, death balls, perma 2++ saves…that is the crap you say no to. Nothing in this edition resembles those old lists or edition of 40K.
Complete skew lists can be very unfun though. If you dont know you will face armour-spam. Or 6 ctans. And you brought a balanced list.
Now if you KNOW tgen rhat 7s different
I'll say that there's a difference between a power imbalance and a "There's no way in hell I'm going to win, or even enjoy that match."
Just a reminder that Skari took a big fat dump on the 6 C'tan build with a Realspace Raiders drukhari army. Army builds matter but the player commanding it matters much more
Yeah Skari took like one of every unit Drukhari has, that was a cool list.
For kill team: I’m not playing against a space marine kill team with anything other than a space marine kill team
I havent REFUSED a match, but I've definitely breathed a sigh of relief when my opponent isnt bringing spacemarines when I want to play my 7w teams hah
Yeah Astartes teams in 3rd have been pretty powerful in my experience. Giving them a faction wide double shoot and double attack was too much, especially the angels of death where the SNIPER has a double shoot.
when the kroot detachment dropped, told a mate i was really excited to try it out and that i would happily vs him with my full kroot list in a casual game. mate proceeds to bring full tank list with flamers to get around my stealth......
Ouch. If you encounter a list like that again, i got brutally traffic jammed a while back by a nearly-all-kroot army that won initiative and catapulted across no-mans land and trapped half my vehicles and several elite shooting in the DZ. might be worth trying that if your local scene uses decently dense terrain :D
Last time I played 40k competitively was in 3rd edition. From that perspective it's really fascinating to me that you list the multiple C'tan list as being actually acceptable in a tournament game. Back in the day you'd have got absolutely nuked on sportsmanship points for taking something that cheesy (we said beardy), which would cripple your result. Also, people wouldn't like you.
The general feeling was that tabletop games always had loopholes and it was kind of on the players to not abuse them - and that went for both casual and competitive play. Of course, people would still push things at the margins (three Wraithlords for Eldar was popular), but they'd at least try and craft a lore justification on why they had that.
The problem with the Eldar Wraithlords (or Eldar Dreadnought, as they had been called in 2nd edition) was that unlike the Ork and Space marine Dreadnoughts, they had a Toughness valu, rather than an Armour value ... making them CONSIDERABLY harder to kill, while costing the same number of points!
I hate Gav Thorpe to this very day!
@@Grubnar Oh boy, guess they didnt learn anything for Horus Heresy tabletop haha. That's how all the dreads work there, and they make vehicles cry
Sorry, but in 3rd using a C`Tan was not "cheese", it was the surest way to loose for Necrons, due to the phaseout rule: when 3/4 of the models (not points, models counted!) with the Necron-rule where killed, your complete army phased out and you lost. C'Tan, Monolith and Pariah did not count as "Necron" for this purpose. So the more of this stuff you had, the faster the phaseout happend. So one usually simply ignored C`Tan (almost unkillable, but the damage output was not that high) an killed regular warriors until all the army disapeared...
@@Grubnar No, the problem wasn`t that it was to hard to kill. Technically you needed almost the same amount of Laskanons, Rockets, Melters etc. The Problem was the "shaken" rule. It was very easy to "shake" a vehicle, and than it was basically useless. Wraithlords had simply 3 LP and you had to remove all of these three to kill it, but until then the Lord was very reliable. and I you manged to get into CC almost nothing could kill him (almost no one used Power fists in that meta, because they sucked)
It was more a point that the regular vehicle rules sucked and that the Wraithlord was the nly "working" Dreadnought, because he did not count as one... won`t blame Gavin, its the base rule that sucked....
@@alexanderschulz7924 true, but I just meant the idea of a really heavily powergamed unrealistic list, not literally taking C’tan
Imagine you sit there for days and days trying to paint your army and pack all these models up for a game, just to arrive and he tells you "I don't play against that army, you can't paint" ...
I can see how humanity can create another chaos god just off that..
Back in 8th Ed Warhammer Fantasy, much of the independent tournament scene would have a “Composition” element to your overall tournament score, which would usually count at least 25% of the total. Hyper-competitive builds taking advantage of all of the broken and massively OP elements would result in getting a very low score for composition, making it much harder to win 1st overall.
It stopped most people from bringing broken-OP lists, since the kind of players who would take advantage of the list loopholes for max on-table power were the same ones who wanted a shot at the 1st Overall ranking, and tanking your comp score too much made getting 1st nearly impossible, no matter how well you did on the tabletop.
We've had a similar strategy on our tournaments. Basic army was 1850pts, but for lagging armies it was more, up to 2250 for Tomb Kings by the End Times. You also could get more points in your list for abandoning "meta" choices
Just force necrons to only be able to take one c'tan and it would be fine. C'tan should be a center piece unit, not filler. I hate that their balance to them will just be point increases which they will reach a point to where its not worth because outside of them being a kinda hard to kill beat stick. They don't support your army so you're taking them for the stats. I don't want them overcosted to where nobody will run them, but I don't want it to be where why would you take anything else other than them. Also necrons have a internal balance issue so there isn't alot of other options for them.
One epic hero per list would be a fine rule. Force thematic lists around an epic hero if you choose to run one, but no points change for what they do.
I'll say two in 2000 points, only one will be too weak🤔
Or wouldn’t a command point penalty system around odd army selections be fantastic.. man I hate 10th edition for doing some things right but killing useful mechanics
@@shadowmancy9183 unironically would kill necrons i think
One like every 500/750 points i think is fine so people playing apocalypse can take more.
I am bringing my Deathwatch to my first RTT next month. I will most likely get tabled all three rounds, but suffer no the xenos.
I always include a legends datasheet (its usually a multimelta razorback) to character check my opponent, if they don't want to play, I probably didn't either.
Would have to do it with my Lynx in the future
Legends are find.
As a Guard Tank Destroyer and Elysian Sniper squad user i hear this.
If GW EVER released the models AND the rules, play them. Anyone who disagrees isn't worth playing.
I'm yoinking this idea for my local club. Absolutely brilliant vibe check.
anytime I make a list that is themed or fun and my opponent is running a sweaty tournament list knowing full well I wont stand a chance against it
In a casual setting i hate playing against the same list time and time again, It's the only time I've ever said I want to play against any of your other armies not the same deathguard list.
I remember when you only had a few thousand subs. and suddenly you are one of the biggest Warhammer channels, just top-tier insight and commentary on the hobby consistently.
Well done man!
Go back to the old way of building armies, 2 HQ, 6 Troops and 3 of everything else. It made sense, it still makes sense and it removes shitty combos like this that are pure cheese and designed to be win at all cost
The old days were also full of cheese. You won’t be able to take out the competitiveness of a game advertised as competitive.
The old way also only worked when every faction was a cookie cutter mold with a different flavor of cookie. If I was FORCED to take 6 units of Khorne Berzerkers in 10th edition as a World Eaters player, I'd actually have more fun instantly surrendering at the start of the match instead of watching 1,060 points of models get blown off the board by any faction with slightly passable shooting.
@kamikazekalamari I didn't say that the old versions of the game didn't have cheese, but the game felt more fun. Army building felt more fun because you had to make choices. Most of my tanks are in heavy support, better choose what I want them to do, but that might lock me out of having dreadnoughts. Now, given enough points, I can take 3 of every tank and any dreadnoughts I want.
As to the game being competitive focused, I don't like it and don't agree that it should be the games main focus. One of the first things the rulebook mentions is about having fun. For me, I think fun and casual play should come first, and competitive games should be secondary. I'd probably go as far as splitting the rules and points into 2 systems.
@OGXenos but you weren't forced to take 6 units of bezerkers in older editions. All you had to take was 1 HQ and 2 Troops, after that it was free game as to what you picked
Too bad this is very bad for eldar, especially if we have to take guardians.
This is why I lean very heavily into the "rule of cool". As long as what I have built/painted/fielded is what I enjoy, I do not mind too much about my opponents army. For a casual meet up, if the overall day is enjoyable and both players can laugh it all off then all is good. The challenge is when the opponent is one who has mathed out the meta and takes vocal joy out of stomping then they may not get a game next time.
look, If i'm just getting into your game, and one of my first gaming experiences with it is someone min-maxing to win every game, and using every rule to it's most "as written" stance possible. I'm probably never going to play again.
think about that, Do you want to be the reason someone never plays your favorite tabletop wargame again? Do you want to be the reason someone has bad memories/experiences with the game? if you do. Keep rules lawyering and min-maxing your teams.
but if you don't. Consider why you were playing like that in the first place.
I stopped playing Star Wars Legion because the Community i was in started getting extremely toxic over tiny things, Like I hadn't played Legion in about 6 months, and While Playing with someone I got a rule regarding Vehicle Deployment wrong. However My opponent instead of kindly saying "Hey excuse me, you actually got deployment wrong, it's supposed to work like this..."
Instead i got "You deployed your units wrong." without any explanation. and when asked for more detail "I thought you knew vehicles rules, as you're running two vehicles". himself forgetting the last time i played was half a year ago, so no shit i'm going to forget something. (For clarity, It was about the size of base that can be deployed on vehicles).
So I just said "okay, we're not playing anymore. You made a choice to be a disrespectful asshole instead of kindly explaining how i got a rule wrong. I'm done playing with you. If you're looking for someone to blame for why you didn't get to play legion tonight? It's exclusively your fault, and your utterly disrespectful behavior towards me."
I swear, some wargamers forget that you still have to be nice to the people you're playing against.
Too many people forget these are 2 player games
I like your opening point: I think the player is more important than the list- I can have fun being tabled in a game if my opponent is a fun dude and brings a good attitude. Meanwhile, a balanced list with an awful opponent...
I generally developed a rule against armies that ran 50% armor/monsters. Bonus points for epic heroes.
However in 10th, it feels like every imperium list is running 70% of its point value in vehicles and epic heroes.
I just want to mash some infantry into the opponents infantry and scrap for an objective, but vehicles in 10th with high toughness and free sponsons and main weapons just answer every situation, especially when an opponent runs 4-6 of them.
It becomes more of a stat check, if you happen to bring 50% of your army as anti vehicle units you basically gaurantee a win against those lists. I wouldn't blame any guard player for bringing lots of tanks though, as otherwise it would be even more obscenely expensive to build a playable army.
I just think tanks are cool :(
10th has been over for about a year-year and a half. No plan or support, just new kits from GW and FAQ’s that were written a year ago. 11th is around the corner. Just play Space Marine 2 or Darktide lol.
Maybe rather than coming up with bullshit rules based on nothing but your own poor opinion, you should get better at the game, build balanced lists.
@@jacket2848 I play with what I have. Spending 200-300$ on anti tank options or doing the same to buy deep strike objective scorers isn't in my cards.
Tank and knight lists have always been contentious, telling people to just "get better" is as much of a meme as "utilize your charge better" or saying "just roll higher" The issues are outside my zone of control unless I spend money or use psychic powers tot ell the future and know my opponent is going to bring an all tanks/knights list
Mordian Glory had a good example and discussion around this recently. Went to a tournament with an elite infantry heavy guard list and ended up matching against 3 Chaos Knight armies and after two rough skew matchups he opted out of the third.
This really is an issue of removing the force organization detachements. Arks of omen detachement was a funny and novel concept for the end of an edition but when I saw they made it the norm for 10th I was very worried, and I think I've been right to be.
Before even watching the video: I once refused to play my roommate if he ever puts his squad of Harlequins on the table. It was late 4th or early 5th edition and they would act according to night rules and could only be shot from less than 12 inches. My CSM could do basically nothing against them all game and it was quite frustrating. No fun to play against at all. If something is just NO fun to play against and only fun to play with because it literally bulldozes the competition then I don't want to waste my time with it.
It makes sense if you are playing casually but competitive ain’t no way
There is just something about competitive play that sucks the fun out.
@@isaacgraff8288 Depends on why you play. If play to compete, then he competition is the fun part. If you dont play to compete, then playing playing vs competitive is stupidly pointless. But you cant really complain if you show up to a competitive game, unprepared.
@@isaacgraff8288 The 'fun' in competition is finding out, amongst and against others of the same mindset, truly what is the strongest armies and strategies available to the current format.
I accept the game itself is less fun inherently than playing casually, but then again, thats not why I'm here
@@renzbolado153 I think the "fun" is more in the constant meta chasing, if they really wanted to find out what was best they would get mad at GW for constantly updating the rules. The meta that develops changes so fast it can't help but be shallow. Games that have really cooked a long time tend to have much deeper meta (StarCraft Brood War is a great example from video games. It has a meta developed over decades and is still evolving).
@@Dram1984 yeah you know what, fair.
While the point I described is still accurate for my perspective, meta-chasing is probably the more predominant mindset with the current circumstances, which I kinda hate ngl
My first experience with 40k was saying I'd be interrested in playing Tau since they look cool, the guy I talked to saying nobody would ever play with me 'cuz I'd just stand back and fire from distance doing nothing else the whole game, then backpedalled saying he's just joking.
Honestly I started to feel that way against most matchups. Every man and his dog plays competitive 40K these days. I’ve never denied a game based on faction/ list, but definitely against our local ‘that guy’
yeah i feel that, the game itself can be fun with/against most armies but the wrong person can ruin any game. i'd usually reject playing a person over rejecting an army.
I remember back in the start of 8th in our LGS we were playing the Plague Wars campaign and this guy brought something like 200 blue horrors and 6 daemon princes (3 from daemons, 3 from chaos space marines). He took 45 minutes to deploy and then every turn was just moving ahead the board 6in with the horrors in a line and the daemon princes behind, no dice rolling or anything, just 30-40 minutes of moving all the horrors. Once the 6(six) daemon princes got inevitably to melee he just wiped everything.
This is what is wrong with the tourney mindset dominating the hobby. Setting up lists just to be optimized rather than fun is just a toxic mindset for casual gamers, but its required for tourney players.
We need to establish something for the casual players. Something that outlines for newer players the idea that a casual game is for fun and you can do what you want. Back in the day, we had to agree on what terrain gave cover saves. That sort of friendly collaboration is not built in the rules anymore.
What you ask for is One Page Rules. Easy, fast, balanced and without the necessity of being studying the misions of the pack, changes, FAQs,…
@pablofernandez9366 uh, no. What I am asking for is just for people to change their hobby mindset to be more creative and less dogmatic when they play toy soldier games. 10th edition, ironically, has some of the most flexible rules for 40k in decades. It's not hard to just come up with your own missions and rules.
Play crusade, if somebody goes to a crusade with 6 ctan, consider looking for different groupmates
This existed all the way through 8th and 9th. It was Open Play, nd it was great. Unfortunately people mostly decided that Matched Play (and specifically tournament play at that) was the only way to play, to the point that many new people entering the hobby didn't realise there was any other way to play. Now, in 10th GW has just doubled down on that.
Just play like that. There is literally nothing stopping you from playing like that.
>Warhammer is more balanced than it ever has been
Yeah, I dont really feel that is accurate. Simpler? Sure, but not more balanced.
Nobody has to play against anyone. But keep refusing and you'll probably find yourself the one being avoided!
Other way around where I am run lists like this and you'll soon find yourself shunned.
@@newhope33 I mean respect and fun does also work both ways and if your list is super meta/oppressive you can consider changing it to make it fun for your opponent too.
My time is more valuable than other peoples' fun. Every single last online multiplayer game is ruled by sweat lords who play the game like a job and force everyone else to go ham to compete or have 0 chance at winning. If I'm going to be forced to treat what should be a fun pass time as a job, then I'm simply going to walk away and do something better with my time. Because at that point, any expression in my own form of play is dead and buried and I'm instead simply fulfilling some predetermined set of criteria to "win".
@@frankfrankerson782 This. In my case I run a small business and can more or less work 24/7 if I wanted. My standard weekend rate is $125/hour plus I have a family, so please don't waste my time. I have much better things to do that keep up with the current "meta" and rules updates for some silly game. If that offends you I'm sorry but my time is mine and I will not allow you to waste it.
Maybe if you schedule a game with someone show up then refuse and do it to multiple people that could happen. If your LGS is hyper competitive then you find another location to play, which is what happened to me. We had a tournament player that was banned for cheating for a year from ITC, everyone that went up to the store was all about the competitive meta.
As other people have said though, my time is worth something. I have limited hobby time an showing up for a game with someone who just want to see how fast his new broken list can table me is not a fun experience.
I once played a Dystopian Wars tournament where the winner was the best "player of wargames" rather than the best battlefield commander. (There was a best commander award but no one cared about it)
Painting quality, Sportsmanship and Quality of Force Composition are all rated 1-5 points by your opponents. You also got 1-5 points from the games outcome (major lose to major victory). All points were tallied at the end of five rounds.
It was by FAR the best tournament I'd ever played in. Despite only being 25% of the total score, winning or losing was still very important because almost everyone scored well in the other catagories.
Suffice to say each and every game against each and every player was most excellent.
I refuse to play 40k entirely. Ascend to my level.
When I bring a real skew list (usualy a thematic) and dont know who Im playing I bring enough so that I can change it into a more balanced army but I would never drop out from a game that was decided in advance.
I have this nightmare situation ones, I got to play about 1 game per week. And we set up a 2v2 total 4k on each side. After we had gone trough lists, set up the table and deployd and our oponents had done there first turn my teammate (who was realy salty after some realy bad dicerolls) decided that he was done and left.
So with traveltime and preporation I had already spent most of the day and talked to the other two when my teammate had left, they playd a new game against eachother and I went home.
So its not juts a comitment for you, its a comitment for your oponent as well and when you throw in the towel you might ruin his only game for the week/month as well.
Key is to talk about it first.
I've had games where in the first turn I killed 2 models (infantry) and my opponent picked up 1/3 of my army due to dice rolls. We stopped discussed it, then reset the board and played again.
The only time I get salty about dice rolls is I have one opponent that gets salty if he rolls average, his dice suck they don't roll right, it was a bad roll. I've had him roll 20 dice hitting on 3s hit with 18 and complain that he didn't get 6s, he rerolled the misses in to two more hits. Bad dice rolls happen, but complaining that your good dice rolls weren't better really gets to me. I started doing the numbers for his dice rolls when he complains, "that was above average or well above average".
If someone tables you twice during a demo game, maybe they need the win more than you, but I think if that's your demo it's okay to choose your own time over their fun. In a similar way if someone is at a local store and you are looking for a fun game nothing competitive and they bring "THAT" (whatever that maybe) it's okay to respect your time and say no thanks I am not interested in playing against that.
Time is the currency of life be careful how you spend it
If they need to win with little plastic army men so bad. Maybe the hobby isnt for them
This is why I particularly enjoy Hoard Mode, the community co-op game mode designed by the Poorhammer Podcast.
It allows up to 4 players to play The Game cooperatively and help each other out, while a 5th player gets to show off their massive collection and won't just curb stomp them since the AI has to act without player input. It's great for beginners who only have 500 points since it lets them playtest their factions before investing too much money into that faction.
When 5 knights first came out, I politely declined games. I typically bring extra to tailor the list to the strength of the enemy army. The game relies on the individuals to balance, games workshop cannot create a balanced game.
yeah, communication is key.
That C'Tan spam list we saw recently would piss me right off. Anyone who brings that to a casual game had better clear it with their opponent before they bring it because if I got surprised with that list at the table I would just pack up and leave.
Most people even on this channel don't play any games, nevermind refusing one :D
This video speaks to me a lot. I’ve had quite a lot of games that have left a really sour taste in my mouth so I tend to have a pretty good idea of what I’m going to get into. I feel totally at odds with other players when I want to show up for games to hang out with a friend and make some cool cinematic and heroic moments. I don't at all consider myself as competitive, and that seems to mean ally games are losses and only half of them are even fun to play. All in all, this is a great video, thanks for talking about it!
Same for primarchs honestly, like you’re bringing your primarch model to fight my two squads of orks? Lmao ok
whats sucks about ctan spam lists is theyre gonna end up nerfing ctan so its not even worth taking 1 of them instead of just limiting the number you can use so you cant use 6 anymore.
I categorically refuse to play against any greenskins or space wolves, off of principle not balance
Yeah I fucking hate orks
I had a situation like this just yesterday. I wanted to play a kind of derp Dread Mob list I threw together one night and hadn't been able to play yet. The guy that accepted the open invite for a game also chose his fun "meme" list. The problem with that list is that it was heavy tank Guard list he made to mostly mess with some of the local Knights players. Now, he did send me his list earlier that morning, but he sent it in a PDF that both my phone and laptop fought against opening and said PDF was in a super detailed competitive format, which my five minutes awake brain was not going to comprehend. He also tends to try and play a lot faster than I like to, so I feel pressured to move and do things faster than I would otherwise, which is bad when you're trying to play a detachment/list you're not used to. Also, he was still very under the impression that Orks still had access to a lot of their rules and abilities from older additions. Suffice to say that, while it was not a bad game, I would definitely not call it a fun game.
I’m kinda like that with Knights
Thats why I regret following the rule of cool
@@talenloracus7891 knights are so cool but playing with/against them can sometimes be a pain.
I stopped playing knights for this exact reason, always felt like a arse when the list is scewed in causal games.
Knights are a fine army to play with or against. Opponents just get salty because they think the only way to win is killing things, which you can’t always guarantee against knights.
@@AngryAcolyte I don’t mind playing against them but I usually play Orkz and I have little to no anti-tank
I've only recently started looking at 40k, but even in MTG we understand this concept. You don't bring a sliver deck unless you don't want to play, and if you bring an angels commander deck your odds of being refused are almost 90%. People want to have fun and experience the game, not just die helplessly with no real chance of fighting back. If you have a build that is super op (but not op enough for true competitive), then you find a friend who is willing to take turns playing punching bag with you so you can both play your builds.
i personally would love to play into 6 ctans just to see if i can beat it
I once went back to a town I knew a small and hardcore warhammer community resided in. They hadn't played a lot of 40k 10th, but many had played earlier edition, and had gone on to bloodball.
A fellow from the club wanted a 10th edition game, and even though I normally favor the tactical and gameplay aspect, I had the foresight to think, that they might very well be new and unexperienced, so I prepared two lists.
I told him in advance I would be playing death guard, so when I arrived, I asked what he was playing. He said he normally played necrons, but as he had heard I would bring death guard he swapped because "my necrons wouldn't have had a chance against your death guards, they are too tough" he said. I therefore thought, ohh this guy is maybe more knowledgeable about the game, or atleast cares enough about meta and tactics to counter pick me. I told him about my plans about two list, and picked the stronger one.
That was a mistake
There was many basic and core rules he didn't understand, and it felt bad having to correct him on things he though was possible, but wasn't throughout the game, and he was completely tabled after only destroying one rhino of mine. I tried to make the best out of the situation for his sake, but I really don't think either of us had a great game that day.
I will not play someone whos army has a better paint job than mine.
I've played 40k since 2nd ed, and through my many years, my main armies (BA and SW) have gone up and down in power; but I've never rejected a game even if it's one-sided from a balance point of view. Generally I care a lot more about who I'm playing against rather than what, and I'd take a fun/polite/positive person with the most broken list over a casual list piloted by a grumpy/negative person (or worse, a cheater).
All tabletop games are ultimately a collaborative experience: talking it out before the game is definitely a good way of going about it for most people, but I sometimes feel the people who refuse games because of the "feels bad of being tabled too early" or not wanting to "waste time on a non-game" could also consider taking some degree of responsibility in their own list writing, to take something that won't get tabled too early and have regular non-games.
This would only be an issue if your army is some sort of extremely skewed (but in the wrong direction) list of models that are really horrible in-game but you somehow love (e.g. a very lovingly converted army), in which case it really is a situation where the owner of this list has to probably find a group of like-minded individuals to play most of their games against (i.e. be less likely to do any sort of pick-up game against a random unknown player).
I have bad trypophobia and the only time I refused to play someone was when they kitbashed their nurgle army to be filled with these small holes everywhere that made me physically ill to look at.
good job on modelling skills if your Nurgle army makes an opponent physically sick xD
@@Braindead154 psychological warfare at its finest
My brother is a Nurgle fan and said it’s very Nurgle thing to do and that guy makes grandpa Nurgle happy
@@jakubprzybylski6670 yes they did an excellent job with green stuff and subsequent highlighting and dry brushing. Every single raised cavity was accentuated 🤢.
@@Braindead154 you would "love" my custom made tyranid hive terrain. :D
Played in a 1000 pt. 40K tournament at my local game shop. Player showed up with a Aeldari Wraithknight with the S20 guns. He wound up winning the tournament, placed the knight in the back and just shot everything. Only person who might have had a chance was someone playing Imperial Knights. Player wasn't a jerk or anything just had a Death Star no one could kill.
I remember dude pulling 2 riptides in 750 game
I never felt so justified to turn him down
Tbf, if that's in 10th, it's both A bad and B, only like 190pts, not outlandish
@@ramsayferguson528 it was 8th
Therefore i charged my wraithlord on it
@MrFiremagnet yea that's fair
I’ve never refused a game, but I’ve also only ever played against my friends or in a tournament setting where I didn’t want to just leave.
And even when I have gone against some dumb lists, I’ve never played against a bad opponent. I remember one tournament I brought infantry-only eldar, and my opponent came with two Porphyrions and one other knight. I lost, but it was still fun cuz the opponent was a great guy.
We used to actively bully “win at all costs” try hards. Called them beardy, laughed at them and of course nobody would play with them because it wasn’t fun. “Sorry you wasted your money on 20 wolf guard Terminators with assault cannons, but nobody wants to play an a-hole”
I miss those days.
“We used to foster an incredibly toxic culture for gaming” sounds awful, hope your gaming scene fell apart because of this
2nd edition, eh? Also known as "Hero-hammer!"
11:28 Honestly this, in my group of friends we just talk about what we are going to take.
you will have convos like:
"Oh I am going to have a bunch of vehicles, so make sure you have at least 1 or 2 things that can deal with that"
"Ok cool"
I never refused a game. Once I am in the room - it's on. I have lost many games vs different lists and never backed down. Yes - I may concede after 3 turns but never denied to play.
I think this is the best approach - never deny to play, and be happy to concede.
Well... how about if you've played against them before, and this is outside of a tournament/competition setting, and in the past they have been obnoxious and you know it's a complete counter to your list. Do you still play them?
@@GallantLee where I live the community is on the small side and we are (I tend to think) pretty chill. We have try hard guys but that never has been an issue. Hard counter lists (in my eyes) are a challenge to be overcome. I don't care. Example - we had 2v2 games (2k point - 1k per player). One guy showed with Stormsurge and crisis suits vs my crusade squads. I still played even though turn 3 my army was almost completely destroyed but gave him a bloody nose and we won by points since I tied almost all shooters. :) So - as a Black Templars player - Accept Any Challenge, Not Matter the Odds! :D
Don't schedule a game against someone you don't want to play. If you go to a new location or are new to the game it is one thing, I have seen people who want to table new players "to show them how the game is played" it is a good way to get people to leave and not come back.
Like you I will typically play a couple turns, but I keep track of the board state and concede when it becomes obvious I don't have a chance. As much as people like saying play it out, if I have to roll above average on every dice roll, hope my opponent rolls well below average and makes multiple mistakes I offer a hand shake and call it, I explain my reasoning and they normally agree.
I got into Warhammer because of Dawn of War 1 (I played T'au there)
It was a joy to find out my favourite faction is hated by everyone after i picked up the models.
Knights shouldn’t be in this game and I will die on that hill.
Go back to imperial agent?
As models, or as an army?
@@Dorsidwarf the latter
Ez fix is to add cultist units to knights, maybe a biker/horseback unit and a support/tech priest and it’s a solidly fleshed out army
At the moment, for my World Eaters, it's going to be Guard. It was already one of our worst matchups, but now Berzerkers are entirely invalidated against them. The addition of Aquilons means that they can trap Rhinos, while preventing the Berzerkers inside from being able to disembark. And with Blood Surge getting gutted, they can just reliably shoot them off the board, since they have no chance of being a threat so long as they're 7.1+ inches away.
Guard are also expected to be one of the top armies now anyways.
You don’t refuse matches in tournament play. You lose that match if you refuse to play. Casual play you can make up whatever silly rules you want even, “I don’t play against things I lose to.”
I don’t think that’s what the video is talking about
The video is talking about people just meta-chasing and making the most anti-fun lists imaginable.
Yeah, I mean simply put, people need to TALK. If you’re getting a pickup game in - reach out to your opponent about the time you’re looking for. If they don’t respect it, then leave. It’s a hobby and free time is limited to most working folks.