PDA

View Full Version : 40k Player making fun of fantasy.



Lord Anathir
25-10-2005, 22:53
Has it ever happened to you?
I play both fantasy and 40k and i see them as two differnet games, not somthing that can be compared.
Ive come across a 15 year old who plays 40k and makes fun of fantasy way too much, and its really got on my nerves. What do i say to this punk?

big squig
26-10-2005, 01:24
Yeah, it blows...I don’t play fantasy because it’s not my cup of tea, but I don't shove it down everyone's throat. Just imagine if you were a LotR fan. Both sides of the warhammer fandom do everything but throw feces at LotR fans for no reason either.:(

Kids tend to be the worst, but many adults are just as immature too. People just need to grow up, notice it's just a game, and accept the fact that many people enjoy other games.

Jedi152
26-10-2005, 07:37
I've seen young kids take the p*ss out of fantasy - not realising that i used to play 40k when they were about 5, and gave it up before they were even into the hobby.



What do i say to this punk?
Do you think that a swift meeting 'twixt mr fist and mr mouth be in order?


Just tell the kid that fantasy is older - it is the original GW game.

Insane Psychopath
26-10-2005, 07:49
Tell them to shut up & he dose not know what he talking about.

I am mainly a 40k player fopr the past... since 3rd rule came out. But I still like WFB as there are some great models & I am thinking of getting Chaos army started.

End of the day there kids & as such go "oooww I hate that" thought they never tryed it.

End of the day this is why I am happy that I attend the Veterans night, as me & the fellow vet are there to relaxe after a ahrd day of work/college & the last thing we want is a punk being a b****.

But again just tell them to shut up, anything they do just get a GW staffer.

IP

Sai-Lauren
26-10-2005, 08:22
Just tell them to go and play with their kiddies toys, while you play a real game that requires an IQ of more than 2.5 to understand ;) .

Griefbringer
26-10-2005, 08:24
Is there something wrong in making fun of fantasy? I mean, here on Warseer fantasy forums we are all the time making (usually good-natured) fun of some aspects of 40K, so I guess it is fiar and right that the opposite is also going on somewhere. Some aspects of WHFB can be a bit silly, too.

immortal99
26-10-2005, 08:35
i don't like fantasy (might just be the square bases :D ) but i don't go round making fun of fantasy (apart from the bases :D )

Gaebriel
26-10-2005, 08:47
I always experienced it the other way round, but I don't play Fantasy, so I wouldn't know...

It's just a kind of selfmade elitism. It's common, especially among younger kids to artificially elevate the own group (or in this case subgroup), to feel more secure. And what better way to elevate the own group by bashing another...

Lord Lucifer
26-10-2005, 08:50
Just be upfront and honest about how he's annoying
Say "Hey kid, go bug your parents"

If he continues, ask if you throw a stick, will he leave?

If that also fails, be as obnoxiously annoying as humanly possible. Every time he makes a remark, be a complete jerk back. You'll look like a right prick, but it'd probably be a fun way to resolve the situation

Imbroglio
26-10-2005, 08:50
Ask the kid why he doesn't like fantasy? If it become clear that the rules are that much more complicated and he doesn't understand, then well... kick his ass at 40K a few times, then invite him to take the ****.

Regards,

-- Imbroglio

Jedi152
26-10-2005, 08:56
@Gaebriel: Couldn't have said it better myself.

Yep, just make some childish comment about WFB being to hard for him to understand.
If you really want to make him look like a prat, do it in front of his friends, and invite them to join in. Having the p*ss taken out of him by an older guy and his friends too will soon quieten him down!

Jedi152
26-10-2005, 09:11
:D Kick him inna fork!

ironduke
26-10-2005, 10:47
My retort to these people after palying all three systems and being in the hobby for 11 years is why have i decided to not play 40k and now only play lotr and fantasy. Answer simplicity it has become to simple and has got to the stage when the person who rolls the most dice wins, sad but its true.

I'd just tell him when hes ready to take off his learner wheels then come and play warhammer where tactics are heavily involved and it requires to think on your actions rather than resort to luck.

Nineswords
26-10-2005, 11:32
The guy is 15, nuff said. Besides, EVERYONE knows the square game is far superior to the round one anyway!

tzeentchgiant
26-10-2005, 11:56
Laugh it off, in general berate him for his liking of the simpler system of 40k, it may not be true, it may not be your opinion, but that always gets these diddies off my back.

TG

Lord Lucifer
26-10-2005, 13:17
Give him a plastic 'L' plate, or a copy of 'My First Warhammer Fantasy Army - A gaming supplement for 40K Hobbyists' as a booklet clearly made for small children

Eldanar
26-10-2005, 13:32
Ask him why, specifically, he doesn't like WHFB.

If he replies with a comment regarding any of the following: magic rules, super characters, all heavy cav core armies, Elves, Ogre Kingdoms, ratling guns or "sniper" cannons...then walk away, because he probably knows what he is talking about...

:p

Anvils Hammer
26-10-2005, 13:34
no need to take the **** out of 40k guys, keep it civil,

i dont play fantasy because i find there is less potential for making unique armys than in 40K, one fantasy world compared to an entire galaxy.
i may well start at some point, probably with a an army of skeletons.

as for dissing other games, i generally dont, but i do get wond up when people keep claiming that fantasy is an inherantly superior game, it works both ways.

Gaebriel
26-10-2005, 13:40
As technically both games are easy to master, I don't see the point in using that kind argument anyway. Gaming is not rocket science, after all.

Chuffy
26-10-2005, 14:20
Warhammer 40,000?

More like Snorehammer 40,000.

fantayz 4 lyf my doggiez!!1

But seriously, I hate 40k, I think it's pretty terrible but I wont just slag it off continually, most of the hate comes from how much it's played down at my local GW; ALL THE TIME AND THEY DON'T EVEN PLAY MISSIONS.
AAARRRGH!

Where was I?

Yeah, people just slagging off the game for no reason is pretty pathetic, as I said, I don't like 40k, but I won't insult it and try and annoy the people who play it. But thats the problem, you have the 40k players saying how stupid it is that units are perfectly square in WH (guess they know nothing of pre-modern warfare then...), you've got the WHFB players moaning about the simplicity of 40k and you've got the LOTRers moaning about both of the systems and praising the Priority phase.

Basically, ignore them.

hairyman
26-10-2005, 14:39
Complexity doesn't necessarily equal a better game... 40k benefits from its simplicity and speed of play.

Sadly, as a general rule (from what I've seen in GW shops and on forum boards), those gamers who are muppets to begin with will either also be immature (40k) or have a superiority complex (WHFB).

But, yeah:

Basically, ignore them


The guy is 15, nuff said

Lord Anathir
26-10-2005, 15:23
LMAO! Thanx you guys! The kid was really ticking me off. 'Original Warhammer Game' that sounds good. And the 'Requires a higher iq then 2.5' is a little funny too. (no offense to all you 40k players). I am starting 40k too, so i really want to bash his tau (500pt game, im using sis or battle).

Inquisitor Samos
26-10-2005, 15:42
Seems to me it's a fairly silly thing to come down too hard on someone by going on about how their favorite among GW's game systems is too complex or too simple, anyway: neither 40K nor WHFB nor LoTR are all that complicated, as tabletop wargames go.

Now something like "Attack Vector: Tactical" or its spin-off, "Saganami Island Tactical Simulator"......... those are complicated wargames!

Inquisitor Maul
26-10-2005, 15:47
Seems to me it's a fairly silly thing to come down too hard on someone by going on about how their favorite among GW's game systems is too complex or too simple, anyway: neither 40K nor WHFB nor LoTR are all that complicated, as tabletop wargames go.

Now something like "Attack Vector: Tactical" or its spin-off, "Saganami Island Tactical Simulator"......... those are complicated wargames!

Or try Full Thrust with the vector system. Now, there we're talking about planing and tactics :D

Mouldsta
26-10-2005, 18:40
The thing I dislike about 40K, is not the fact that it's simple to play (as simple games are great, try firing weapons in Inquisitor and you'll know what I mean), but it's the lack of tactics to back that simplicity up. Games don't need endless charts, modifiers and rules to make them good (again, look at how complicated it is in Inquisitor to just shoot someone), but they DO need a core of solid tactics to make them enjoyable.

Look at how simple BFG or epic are - weapons come in 2 types, quick range check and make saves etc, but there's TONS of tactics and outmanouvering involved in those games. With 40K I find tactics come down to "would I benifit from being closer or further away?", "shall I move?" and "will I do well in assault?",
with the net result being something like **further, no, no*** (guard) = stand there and shoot, or **closer, yes, yes** (nids) = run across board.

Now I like the 40K models, and the concepts (titans, thunder hawks etc), and the background, but I find the game to be lacking. Games should be easy to learn and difficult to master, I find 40K to be easy to learn, not very much to master; something that left me quite dissapointed. I end up playing epic, gothic, Inquisitor, necromunda because I like the 40K universe, but there's a bit of a hole where i'd like a squad sized game, if only the current incarnation wasn't a bit too much like "rock paper scissors" for my liking.

*sigh*

Wez
26-10-2005, 19:29
Go cry in a corner, write a poem about it and post it on Warseer!:)

-Wez

Jabba_TheHunt
26-10-2005, 22:04
When I worked for GW my manager and I had a great tactic for dealing with the snot-nosed urchins that rubbished Warhammer Fantasy.

Me: "Boss, does GW make a game for girls?"
Boss: "Yep, they called it 40k"

Cue laughter from WHFB veterans and swift exit for not-so-smug urchins.

Angelripper
26-10-2005, 22:46
I play both 40K & Fantasy and I see no point in dissing one. Fantasy is a bit more complex ok, so? 40k is faster to play, right and?. If someone has any problems with on of them, It's his problem. If he wants to argue about it. Ignore him

Lord Lucifer
26-10-2005, 23:13
For reference I play Warhammer and 40K, amongst a whole load of other systems.
Only suggested the insulting of 40K if reasoning fails, in which case you may as well enjoy the insult-match seeing as your game's being ruined by some prat anyway

Autobot HQ
26-10-2005, 23:48
In all honesty having played both games for nigh on 12yrs and working in the GW it's honestly viewed that the range of difficulty (not that any of them are difficult) is LOTR, WH40K then WHFB.

WH40K is a case of once you know the rules, you're in for life; It's simple, there isn't much you need to worry about in tactics, you'll learn what your armies good at then just hope you do your job better than your opponent does.

WHFB is highly reguarded the king of GW games; It's much more about tactics, with it's LOS and charge arcs, the diff. movement values, the magic phase, all of it makes it an easy game to learn, but much harder to master.

If the lil' snot keeps on bashing WHFB, just crush his Tau like bugs and tell him it was because of your superior tactical knowledge gleaned from playing WHFB (Not because you have a 3+ Sv lol ;) )

WLBjork
27-10-2005, 06:56
Now something like "Attack Vector: Tactical" or its spin-off, "Saganami Island Tactical Simulator"......... those are complicated wargames!

Funny you should mention that, I've got SITS on order. Be my first non-GW Wargame proper :D.

Might be more complictaed rules, but it looks from the web-site (Adastra (www.adastragames.com)) that they know how to put all the appropriate rules together, instead of spread out (*thinks of Stand and Shoot for WHFB*)

Gaebriel
27-10-2005, 07:10
I feel sorry for all those Fantasy players that have problems grasping the concept of their game and thus think it's harder to master... :p

But isn't the question more one of if you like Fantasy or Science Fiction (or medieval Fantasy and contemporary Fantasy, before we argue about that)?

I mean, if I were after a tactical simulation game for the game's sake, the last thing I would choose would be GW games. What I choose GW games for is the background and/or the models.

So I don't understand reservations aimed at the game system, because it comes down to a choice of flavour. It's like "I think black clothes are cooler" vs. "No, red clothes are". Or perhaps those reservations are uttered by those who only value the game side, who knows...

Slappy
27-10-2005, 07:24
I feel sorry for all those Fantasy players that have problems grasping the concept of their game and thus think it's harder to master...

When I first got into Fantasy I thought the same thing. I was like "wow this game takes more tactics and is deeper." After years of playing I finally saw past that illusion. If people think Fantasy is deep strategy...I honestly don't know what to say.

rkunisch
27-10-2005, 08:45
What do i say to this punk? Just put on a knowing smile, mumble a little bit to yourself and then say "Yeah, I already figured that you are not able to understand a rule set that requires strategic thinking. Don't feel ashamed you may learn in a few years time."

The whole topic which game is superior is really pointless in my opinion. There are so much different arguments (rules, background, minis, available time, available oponents, available game boards, current mood, etc.). Personally I played a lot of games and very seldom had one which made no fun.

Have fun,

Rolf.

ironduke
27-10-2005, 08:52
Its not deep strategy, but at least it has some. This is not me dissing or insulting the players this is just my stand and viewpoint from my experience. Ive been to tournaments for all three core systems and to be honest one of the reasons i don't play some armies is because it makes me think like i'm playing 40k for example my slayer army.

Im not bothered about the background because i roleplay and read fantasy books and i could easily pick up something that has more depth and background than the warhammer universe or 40k, once again not an insult but an observation. I don't think warhammer is superior , well let me rephrase that to my own tastes it is superior. Everyone has there tastes and its their choice i have no gripe about that.

Its not the rules mastering that counts it is at the end of the day how you apply the rules and the tactics you use. You can win a fight in warhammer with hardly having to roll a dice, more realistic which i like and more fun to play. Theres nothing worse than playing an army that just throws bucket loads of dice and the only tactical choice you have is which unit do you shoot with what, sorry to get on peoples nerves but thats not really a choice.

Anyway ive think ive rambled enough but theres nothing worse than people insulting people for their games of choice, but even worse are the people who insult people who have given their opinion on what they think of the game so you lot you know who you are

Pack it in. Its only a game at the end of the day and you don't have to act like you have the higher moral standing because you don't have an opinion that annoys any party.

Once again i apoligise

Ironduke

Zoink
27-10-2005, 11:25
Yeah. People getting superior about which miniature wargame they play really is verging on the ridiculous.

All of the GW games are tactics-light compared to most 'serious' historical wargamery or many other games of strategy. There's a much higher random element, and therefore they're less tactics-based than, say, chess. I like this - it's more fun and certainly more unpredictable (and gives crap generals a chance).

But having said that I've switched to fantasy in the hope of finding a more tactical game than 40k which I find frustratingly random at times. Our group are quite well matched and we all know each others' armies inside out so it often comes down to who rolls the dice best.

hairyman
27-10-2005, 11:30
This is true, but I'm sure once we get a handle on WHFB it will be pretty much the same. If you want deep strategy, play chess. If you want fun, play warhammer.

EVIL INC
27-10-2005, 16:56
To be honest, I usually hear it the other way around. Its usually the fantasy players making fun the the 40k players.:rolleyes:
Anyways, both games require the same ammount of strategy and tactics. Both games require the same skill in paining and modeling.
Some players just prefer different "styles" of strategy and tactics. The styles differ but not the ammount. Then again, it could be because 40k usually has the younger crowd playing it. This is not because it is lacking in anything (remember, both games are equal), it is because of finances. Younger people generally dont have as much money. 40k requires you to buy less models so is cheaper to play. Also, to add to that, today is far more advanced technically then then it was when the older crowds were kids. That means while us old timers were running round with toy swords, todays kids are more likely to be playing space shooter games on a computer. That generally means the space age stuff attracts more of today's younger crowd while the "old timers" want to play and have fun in a way that reminds them more of thier childhood.
This all means that many 40k players think of fantasy as old codger stupid games while many of the fantasy players assume that 40k must be too simple or lacking in tactics and strategy if those kids can play it. Now, these are broad generalizations, but you can see how it can lead to individuals within each group making fun of the other.

neXus6
27-10-2005, 23:41
I've played both games for a fair few years, but fantasy the longest. I have to say that while they are very different games and really shouldn't be compaired Fantasy is a bit more complicated. Sure Fantasy isn't a million miles more complicated and tactical, but it is a bit more.

As for a young 40k player making fun of Fantasy, just telling him to be quiet would be one possible course of action, another would be to show him the game properly (though I doubt you'd want to do that as the guy sounds like an annoying sod) or simply just ignore him but regardless of what you do make sure you also laugh about him behind his back with the other gamers. :D

blitz589
27-10-2005, 23:56
I play 4ok and i refrain from making fun of fantasy, even though everyones like fantasy is so much more complicated then 40k, a idiot could play 40k, etc, that gets old fast.

polymphus
28-10-2005, 05:35
There are two such people at my club and they make the perfect example of what is acceptable and what is not.

Person #1: acceptable
Plays Tau and says that he doesn't like WFB because he doesn't lkke the background a whole lot and he doesn't like the way CR operates (ranks etc.) He's quite a nice guy and noone minds when he criticised WFB because he does it in an intelligent manner and never goes over the top.

Person #2: not acceptable/really annoying
Plays Ultra-SMurfs and is constantly mocking the Fantasy players and saying "your game sucks". He comes over to the table, picks up minis and begins to say how crappy they look. Him and his toady (person #3) then laugh and wander off looking superior.

None of the WFB at my club (as far as I know) mock 40K because there is no reason to. If you don't like the system don't play it. 'Nuff said.

EVIL INC
28-10-2005, 15:11
Why is it (falsly )assumed that 40k "lacks tactics". That is far from the case. It requires just as much tactical and strategical skill to play 40k as it does fantasy. It just requires different strategies and tactics. Just because they are different does not mean that they do not exist. You always see people say "40k sucks because it doesnt use tactics" or "40k is ok, but I like fantasy because it has tactics". Both are putting down 40k and those who play it. It is just a matter of how annoying or condescending the person is trying to be. To be honest, for every time I have heard a 40k player make fun of fantasy, I have heard 50 fantasy players make fun of 40k.
This is the arguement I always hear. But then to prove my point, I played 40k with some "pure" fantasy players. They lost soundly due to not understanding the tactics required to play 40k. I then played them in fantasy and sometimes won, often lost. I was able to use "fantasy tactics" at almost the same level they were but they had never used the tactics required to play 40k. Why did I win more games at fantasy then he did in 40k? Because I understood the concept that the different games required different strategies and tactics. I was rusty at fantasy ones while he had never developed 40k ones.
Think of it in sports lingo, fantasy = a pure passing game while 40k= a pure running game. Both teams consider thier style better because it works for them. Do they have the right to say that thiers is better? Only so long as they add in that they are speaking for themselves. When the pure passing team tries to run, they lose out just as the running team does when they try to pass.

Minister
28-10-2005, 17:02
In my own opinion, the current Fantasy system is an improvment on the current 40K, particularly in the areas of magic/psionics, the save system (AP values remain a daft idea) and balance between the heroes and their troops (although 5th/2nd edition levels were more than a bit OTT in favour of the characters). However, I like the 40K background far more, and the 40K models suit my taste more. Therefore, at least untill I got an Ogre battalion, I was a pure 40K setting player (Epic is a better system than either, but lacks in visual impact due to the nature of the models, and an oponent is far harder to find).

DeathMasterSnikch
28-10-2005, 17:47
IMO fantasy is better than 40k. Doesn't mean i have to walk around shouting that 40k is terrible just because I prefer FB though.

If somone says one is better than the other it's easier just to make some comment about them playing with toy soldiers :p

That will most likely annoy them no matter waht version they play.

WLBjork
28-10-2005, 21:39
Hmm, now you mention it, yes there is no difference in tactical decisions between 40K and WHFB.

But I feel that WHFB rewards the use of tactics more efficiantly than does 40K.

In 40K/2, ASM was excessive. The better solution (originally posted on Portent) would have been to completely rework all the ASMs rather than the opted-for solution of AP, which has swung the balance too far the other way. GW acknowledge this, but reckon that ASM is worse than AP. I cannot see myself playing 40K again until this problem is fixed.

Exterminatus
28-10-2005, 22:45
I play ( or use to play ) : Necromunda, Gorkamorka, BFG, WH40K, fantasy.

I still have 6000 points of high elves from 4ed. I started out playing fantasy, and I must agree that I start getting more and more urge to play fantasy.

Why should I play 40k when 70% of the players I know play space marines? I like to play against different armies, and in that way fantasy is way superior.

I do enjoy 40k though, and do not mock either one of the games. I find it rather short sighted if you are mocking a game you have never played

Minister
29-10-2005, 00:40
The primary modification which was needed to 40K's armour penetration was to make S5 weapons, at basic, have a -1 modifier. As most basic weapons have S3 or 4, this cuts down the number of modifiers significantly.

But, that's a task for another revision.

Mouldsta
30-10-2005, 13:28
But I feel that WHFB rewards the use of tactics more efficiantly than does 40K.

I think this is one of the key things, so in fantasy getting flanks or rear charges carries bonus's (or penalty) making them something to strive to achieve/avoid having done to you, wheras 40k it doesn't matter how much you outmanover them, if they're within 12" at the start of their turn they can charge you if they want.

Then there's things like baiting - in fantasy you can drag bad ass units away by placing fast rubbish units in front and fleeing from the charge, leaving the bad ass unit unable to kill anything juicy - with 40K there's a 12" ring-o-doom where if a unit starts it's turn within that, it is guaranteed to make combat.

Also chargers going first is a big difference - in WHFB a weaker unit can overcome a more powerful one by outmanouvering it, wheras in 40K the unit that is the most bad ass wins. Having extra attacks doesn't mean diddly if all your guys are lying in bloody chunks by the time they get to attack.


There's plenty more examples, but I think it's things like this that put people off - baiting and misdirection don't work, outmanouvering has no benifits whatsoever, weaker units generally don't ever succeed over better ones (lure them into an ambush only for the better unit to win), so it often becomes a case of "I brought this, if it gets within 12" of you then you die"

The tactics involved in 40K are mainly to do with army building and choosing what unit to detroy first - valid tactics, but a bit basic for my liking. Maybe it's because I've been playing too much epic which rewards or penalises you for EVERY action, including desciding what unit to move first.

EVIL INC
30-10-2005, 17:22
Those are excellent examples of one type of tactics and that particuler types works equally well in both games. Granted that particuler type is used more often in fantasy, but again, there are others that even though used in both are used more often in 40k. There are others such as cover, shooting, dropping, advancing behind vehicles, not to mention missions. The list is just as endless for one of the games as it is for the other.