PDA

View Full Version : When does playing smart start making you a jerk?



Voodoo Boyz
13-04-2009, 02:23
Odd question for the community here.

Many times when people talk about different armies, or how to play against them, most of the time in a competitive setting - there are certain things that one can do to ensure a victory, but it isn't necessarily "fun" for either player.

Problem is that these actions are clearly the best things to do in terms of winning the game, or that other actions will certainly mean you will lose.

Classic examples:

Dark Elves vs. Warriors of Chaos.

If the WoC player takes say, two really hard infantry units (Chosen w/ 2 Warshrines to get EoTG buffs to insane level + Banner of Rage, Warriors unit of Slaanesh/Nurgle w/ Rapturous Standard), some small cav and characters.

As a DE player, if I fight any of the two big infantry units, and likely any of the Knights, I'm going to lose with most things in a DE list.

So I march block the Blocks, redirect them with Cheap Harpies and/or bait with Dark Riders. I do the same to the Cav, kill the light cav, support units, etc.

Except the game becomes far less "fun" since I dictate everything movement wise and basically never engage fully. But I win.

Similar things happen against Dwarf opponents that take "balanced" lists. Send WM Hunters after the Warmachines, send something hard enough to break through the missile troops...and then don't engage anything else and take the easy 300 point win based on those relatively easy kills and table quarters. Again, relatively boring game, but you win. If I fight the blocks...I will likely get ground down and lose.

So at which point does it stop being "the smart thing to do" and start becoming "playing like a jerk"?

Nicha11
13-04-2009, 02:28
If they are taking an easy list then it is being a jerk.

If they are taking a very hard list or power gaming then it is fine.

Sycoa
13-04-2009, 02:32
Well, I think it really depends on the person's respect for their opponent, and their level of maturity. To me, it's just that people don't like to lose, and when they are/have, some folks take it the wrong way, or take it to an extreme.

Rioghan Murchadha
13-04-2009, 02:32
Odd question for the community here.

Many times when people talk about different armies, or how to play against them, most of the time in a competitive setting - there are certain things that one can do to ensure a victory, but it isn't necessarily "fun" for either player.

Problem is that these actions are clearly the best things to do in terms of winning the game, or that other actions will certainly mean you will lose.

Classic examples:

Dark Elves vs. Warriors of Chaos.

If the WoC player takes say, two really hard infantry units (Chosen w/ 2 Warshrines to get EoTG buffs to insane level + Banner of Rage, Warriors unit of Slaanesh/Nurgle w/ Rapturous Standard), some small cav and characters.

As a DE player, if I fight any of the two big infantry units, and likely any of the Knights, I'm going to lose with most things in a DE list.

So I march block the Blocks, redirect them with Cheap Harpies and/or bait with Dark Riders. I do the same to the Cav, kill the light cav, support units, etc.

Except the game becomes far less "fun" since I dictate everything movement wise and basically never engage fully. But I win.

Similar things happen against Dwarf opponents that take "balanced" lists. Send WM Hunters after the Warmachines, send something hard enough to break through the missile troops...and then don't engage anything else and take the easy 300 point win based on those relatively easy kills and table quarters. Again, relatively boring game, but you win. If I fight the blocks...I will likely get ground down and lose.

So at which point does it stop being "the smart thing to do" and start becoming "playing like a jerk"?

Hard to say. Do your opponents seem to actually learn anything from losing in such ways? I know I would personally consider it 'playing like a jerk' if you didn't try your best to beat me.

Classical Mushroom
13-04-2009, 02:46
I'm my eyes jerks are the people who play and try to take advantage of the rules. The people who don't like to hear jokes when they are losing. The people who treat new players as inferior, they are the jerks.

Theres nothing wrong with wanting to win. If both players do their best to win then it is a fun game most of the time. Also long as there is laughter and you make sure your opponent feel relaxed in your company then let your armies do the talking ;)

Kaid
13-04-2009, 02:47
Playing smart while actually playing is one thing, however, playing smart when your making a list is where the switch from playing smart to being a jerk happens.

Meriwether
13-04-2009, 02:49
I think that playing fair, but playing to win, is what the game is about. The challenge of beating your opponent is the fun of the game (for me). If my opponent is going to give me a win because they cannot counter my kill-300-points-and-win-on-quarters strategy, then that's something that _he_ is doing wrong... And he can use this game as a teaching tool so that it doesn't happen again.

Meri

Gork or Possibly Mork
13-04-2009, 03:12
Odd question for the community here.

Many times when people talk about different armies, or how to play against them, most of the time in a competitive setting - there are certain things that one can do to ensure a victory, but it isn't necessarily "fun" for either player.

Problem is that these actions are clearly the best things to do in terms of winning the game, or that other actions will certainly mean you will lose.

Classic examples:

Dark Elves vs. Warriors of Chaos.

If the WoC player takes say, two really hard infantry units (Chosen w/ 2 Warshrines to get EoTG buffs to insane level + Banner of Rage, Warriors unit of Slaanesh/Nurgle w/ Rapturous Standard), some small cav and characters.

As a DE player, if I fight any of the two big infantry units, and likely any of the Knights, I'm going to lose with most things in a DE list.

So I march block the Blocks, redirect them with Cheap Harpies and/or bait with Dark Riders. I do the same to the Cav, kill the light cav, support units, etc.

Except the game becomes far less "fun" since I dictate everything movement wise and basically never engage fully. But I win.

Similar things happen against Dwarf opponents that take "balanced" lists. Send WM Hunters after the Warmachines, send something hard enough to break through the missile troops...and then don't engage anything else and take the easy 300 point win based on those relatively easy kills and table quarters. Again, relatively boring game, but you win. If I fight the blocks...I will likely get ground down and lose.

So at which point does it stop being "the smart thing to do" and start becoming "playing like a jerk"?

What you posted is not being a jerk at all. If you can outmanuever your opponent and pick the fights you can win while avoiding the ones you can't I say go for it. I do see what your saying though. It really depends on the attitude of your opponent. If they are willing to bring every low down tactic in the book just to WAAC then yeah they could be considered a jerk. Against such opponents it just means you should do the same ( fight just as dirty ) or find another opponent. I haven't had this problem with the group that I play with there all very fair players and we all agree about the most important rule is to have a good time. If I did play someone that was being dirty just to get a win then I would fight fire with more fire or avoid playing them if they don't get the point.

Number 24
13-04-2009, 04:26
I would be bored to tears if everyone tried to play nice. I honestly don't see how that could be considered "fun". Play to win. If I lose, it's because I screwed up somewhere (or got unlucky with the dice, but that's part of the deal too--no whining from me about unlucky rolls). I'm going to play to win, and I want my opponent to play to win too. I lose more often than I win right now because I'm still relatively new to the game, but the tables will turn once I get some more battles under my belt and maybe alter my force composition a bit.

Building a competitive army is part of the game. Fielding that army to your advantage is part of the game. Altering your strategy as necessary to win is part of the game. Lucky and unlucky die rolls are part of the game.

Playing "nice" to make others feel better is just lame. My self-esteem is not so fragile that I'm going to crack like an egg if I lose a game of Warhammer. Play to beat me please.

Kerill
13-04-2009, 04:36
You wouldn't be playing at all like a jerk. You would be showing why taking a bunch of warshrines and 2 units of chosen is a really bad idea in the metagame. 1000 points of very slow slowness that will only pay off if your opponent is nice enough to charge in head on.

Sergeant Uriel Ventris
13-04-2009, 04:37
I think the best way to play is playing to win with a balanced and fluffy list. Because that is what the "real" generals in the Warhammer world would have to do, make use of what they have. I'm no tournament gamer or WAACer in the least, so don't listen to me unless you play the game solely for the love of the background, miniatures, hobby, and fun times with your buddies.

Meriwether
13-04-2009, 05:05
On a related note, I do find it absolutely incredible that one can be called a jerk for *trying to win a game*. More, I find it even more incredible that one can be called a jerk for *using tactics to try to win a wargame*.

Meri

Dark14
13-04-2009, 05:39
On a related note, I do find it absolutely incredible that one can be called a jerk for *trying to win a game*. More, I find it even more incredible that one can be called a jerk for *using tactics to try to win a wargame*.

Meri

ya writing a better list and and still using tactics is not cheesy but people will always complain just because they cant win.

being a jerk is taunting and just making fun of the other person(not jokingly).

Godfiend
13-04-2009, 07:29
While I can see the player's frustration at building a massive list of rock-hard infantry and watching it do nothing all game, he should have realized that is what a smart opponent would do. Being a jerk is when you set up your list for cheese or abuse the rules to win. You're just being a good player.

However, talk to your opponents. Maybe they want more combat in their games; less of the WHFB rules & tactics of march blocking and table quarters, and more games of giant blocks of infantry bashing skulls in. If so, set up a list for those games and have fun. You might just be seeing different ideas of what is really fun about the game.

MTUCache
13-04-2009, 08:02
This has more to do with why people play the armies they do, rather than how skillfully they use them.

Really? A WoC player is going to be disappointed when his opponent avoids his rock-hard Knight unit that would literally tear apart almost every unit in the game? Maybe he should have considered that and either spread his eggs into a few more baskets or got enough knights on the table so that they couldn't be avoided.

A dwarf player being insulted because someone didn't mindlessly run their T3 units up into his rock-hard infantry? Ridiculous.

The same thing could be said if you just sat back in your deployment zone and rained down RBX/RBT-fire and magic missiles for the entire game and then got your feelings hurt because someone brought a bunch of 2+ AS units.

If your opponents have a problem with the way people combat their lists, maybe they need to get another list. If they don't like the way people counter their armies, maybe they should choose a different army. Sorry.... that's just the way it goes when you play a one-dimensional army like WoC or Dwarves.

kyussinchains
13-04-2009, 12:40
charging a unit of witch elves or dark riders straight into a unit of dwarf ironbreakers would be playing like a jerk, both scenarios described by the OP sound like sensible tactics to me..... the whole point of some armies is that they play in a certain way. Dark elves are designed to pick off stragglers while maintaining a distance from the danger units, whittle those units down at a distance, then hit them in the flanks or rear. Simply charging straight at those units would be a surefire way to lose the game quickly.

Winning doesn't make you a jerk, annihilating your opponent doesnt make you a jerk, but bragging about it and giving him a hard time most certainly does.... oh and whining if he beat you does too ;)

arch_inquisitor
13-04-2009, 13:22
@ OP don't worry about it, so many people take this game way too seriously and your situation proves it.

You bring a valid non-cheesy list (I hate the term cheesy BTW) and win with tactics. Yet you are still called a jerk.

If an opponent cries over losing in this situation then its their problem not yours.
But if you still feel as though you should do something, bring another army with a non cheesy list and win with that one too.

Mireadur
13-04-2009, 13:22
In a friendly game, aiming from the beginning for a minor victory is totally senseless, nobody would do it anyway. A different thing is when you realize you are going to lose and try saving points. (again in a friendly game, would be silly to do it).

When i play friendlies i try to put as much fight as possible even if it means im gonna lose some extra victory points because, isnt a good challenge between 2 characters or buffed up units much better than any massacre?

Shamfrit
13-04-2009, 13:26
When you charge the unit of 10 spearmen next to a highborn instead of the highborn during turn 6 of a game..this is with a Khorne Jugger Chaos Lord with STR6 and killing blow, when you know the highborn has no pendant and is likely going to die miserably, claiming you 350 points instead of the 100 or so for the Spearmen...

When you start playing with clipping, and only accept challenges if you're in base to base (what, can't you hear me two feet to the left?)

When you start fleeing from every charge during the last 2 turns (which really irks me) and pretty much when you start muttering 'move them over there to claim the quarter' loud enough for your opponent, who is already losing by 1500 points to hear.

Pretty much how me and EvC play all the time then :D

Avian
13-04-2009, 13:43
So at which point does it stop being "the smart thing to do" and start becoming "playing like a jerk"?
This is one of those "yes and no" situations. At some level, we all play this game because we think it is more fun than other things we could be spending our time (and money) on. And at some level, we all play to win (not all of the time of course).

In my experience you will find it much easier to get an opponent if you are not a jerk. More battles -> more victories by not being a jerk.

However, you don't owe the other guy a fun battle at the expense of your own fun. If he makes a dull list you can't actually beat with any sort of reasonable chance, I would say you are perfectly entitled to play defensively for a draw. If the other player brought a reasonable list, on the other hand, and you took the same avoidance list, then fewer players are likely to play you, and you end up with fewer wins in total. A victim of your own success, if you like.

What is a reasonable list and what is too agressive or too defensive will of course depend on each player's view of things, which will again be influenced by his or her gaming group. So there is no clear answer to when playing smart starts making you a jerk. The 'smart' approach, if you ask me, is figuring out a way that wins you battles while at the same time ensures that people don't think you are a jerk and refuse to play you.

Devil
13-04-2009, 13:44
I have never bought into your opponent complaining over what you choose to take. It is your buisness. If its in the book it was stamped and approved by the great smart people down at GW and it is official. It isn't up to us to decide what is fair and unfair.

Voodoo Boyz
13-04-2009, 13:55
This isn't so much about the army you're fielding, but more about how you play certain matchups.

I specifically remember a tournament game with my Ogres where I was playing against a Dwarf army that was mostly Slayers (ie. 3 big blocks) with some shooting support.

I killed his core units (10 Thunderers, 10 Quarrellers, 10 Warriors), killed his Warmachines with Gorgers. And then I turned myself around and ran away from his blocks the rest of the game.

At that point I felt the need to apologize and said "Sorry dude, but if I fight you, I lose."

I had a similar feeling when I played my 'non monster list' DE against a WoC list that was lacking in the Knights department that had two blocks of Warriors/Chosen.

Never engaged their infantry, fought the combats I knew I could win and whenever he got close to a combat with a block, I just stuck a unit of Dark Riders/Harpies in front and forced him to go in another odd direction.

Granted I knew I would lose if one of those units hit just about anything in my army, and this was a tournament practice game so it was expected, but at the same time I felt like "wow, playing like this makes me feel like an ass" since I wouldn't let the guy do a whole lot all game.

theunwantedbeing
13-04-2009, 13:57
Depends on the opponent really.

If what your doing is annoying your opponent and making it unfun for them, and you know this....then your a jerk if you keep doing that.
If you don't see it, your opponent may still think your a jerk though.

It is a game though, a game with 2 people playing.
At some point you have to stop and think "is my opponent enjoying this as much as me?"

You can usually rectify the problem by just joking about it all, but sometimes you need to change what your doing and play into your opponents hands for a bit.

WarlockOMork
13-04-2009, 14:02
I do find it absolutely incredible that one can be called a jerk for *trying to win a game*. More, I find it even more incredible that one can be called a jerk for *using tactics to try to win a wargame*.

i think this sums it up nicely.

im sure everyone if he admits or not, more or less plays the game to win.
sure also to have fun, but you can have fun and try to win! :)

inmo the problem comes when people make use of obscure rules, or bend rules,
or try and interpert in the most horrible way just so they can claim some advantage of it.
thats what i feel makes people jerks.

FictionalCharacter
13-04-2009, 14:12
i had a similar situation years ago when i ran a relatively small ig v. space wolves game. my ig army was basically just hq, a platoons, a veteran platoon with a chimera, a heavy weapons squad, and a leman russ. my opponent fielded all close combat marines and didn't deep strike any of them. he just marched them up the field. he marched his terminators up directly in front of my armor, and then spent the game whining while i shot them down instead of charging my guardsmen out into all of the lightning claws...

i think the game just worked itself into a position where i'd win if we had a gun fight, and he'd win if we fought combat. but, it pretty much came down to him fielding an overly specialized list and completely misusing it, which sounds a lot like what the op is talking about. either you play your game and beat the list or you take a giant dive to validate a misguided plan that isn't your responsibility. that doesn't make you a jerk at all.

EvC
13-04-2009, 14:39
When you charge the unit of 10 spearmen next to a highborn instead of the highborn during turn 6 of a game..this is with a Khorne Jugger Chaos Lord with STR6 and killing blow, when you know the highborn has no pendant and is likely going to die miserably, claiming you 350 points instead of the 100 or so for the Spearmen...

When you conveniently leave out facts like "The High Elf Prince had ASF, Killing Blow sword and re-rolls to hit and wound, and would almost certainly kill the Chaos Lord if he charged in, and there was a unit of Chaos Ogres nearby who did charge the Elven Lord and defeated and killed him anyway, ensuring that the entire High Elven host was destroyed" ;)


When you start playing with clipping, and only accept challenges if you're in base to base (what, can't you hear me two feet to the left?)

When you play with sliding, and as a result enemy slide units into charge range of your flanking troops, or gain other such undeserved advantages ;)


When you start fleeing from every charge during the last 2 turns (which really irks me) and pretty much when you start muttering 'move them over there to claim the quarter' loud enough for your opponent, who is already losing by 1500 points to hear.

Pretty much how me and EvC play all the time then :D

Lol, well we can't all play suicidally and charge our Hydras into Chaos Lords and their Knights, can we? ;)

Anyway, jerkiness is of course in the eye of the beholder. It just sounds like the Chaos player brought a poorly-planned army that begged for opponents to engage it, so of course a good player would not. If all you'd brought was gimmicks, shooting, tricked-out Assassins and the like, I might not especially want to play that army, but I wouldn't call you a jerk, I'd insist on a rematch another time using an army that is better-suited to fighting and giving us both a good game :)

EndlessBug
13-04-2009, 14:42
hey,

That just sounds like you're playing smart. It irritates some people when they can't play on their terms, which is partly how you win games, you have to force the opponent to react to you. Now in this case he had a weak list, especially against DE or WE who can just run circles around him.

I used to play a DE monster list in the old ed, 2 manticores and a dark pegasus noble with dark riders, harpies, shades, CoKs and RBTs. I pretty much just ran rings around my opponents, first 2-3 turns I took out every single support unit in their army, last 2-3 turns I'd charge the main blocks with all my units at once and wipe them out. Now it's one glaring weakness as I'm sure you've spotted is no magical defence. Anyway I played a few games with it, realised it was no fun to play against because they just could not catch me EVER. Now some people played it and didn't complain, one guy who pretty much played an army with a few support unit and 1 unit with all 4 fighty characters in got really pissed off at me because I simply did not engage that unit until turn 6 and only on it's flanks and rear (so that only 2 of the fighty guys could fight), wiped it out and won the game easily. Now granted it was his fault for bringing such a 1D list to the table but I realised after a few games like that, it just wasn't fun to play against sometimes.

Look at your list and decide, is it fun to play against?

If your list contains a dragon, 3 units of Dark Riders, 2 Hydra, Harpies and other fast stuff I'll tell you now it is not fun to fight against. If it's balanced and you just used great tactics then it's his fault for using such a small 1D list.

Shamfrit
13-04-2009, 14:49
Sorry I mean Dreadlord, I keep calling them Highborns cause I'm stuck in 6th Edition names :D

But yes, quite :p

Urgat
13-04-2009, 14:54
Odd question for the community here.

Many times when people talk about different armies, or how to play against them, most of the time in a competitive setting - there are certain things that one can do to ensure a victory, but it isn't necessarily "fun" for either player.

Problem is that these actions are clearly the best things to do in terms of winning the game, or that other actions will certainly mean you will lose.

Classic examples:

Dark Elves vs. Warriors of Chaos.

If the WoC player takes say, two really hard infantry units (Chosen w/ 2 Warshrines to get EoTG buffs to insane level + Banner of Rage, Warriors unit of Slaanesh/Nurgle w/ Rapturous Standard), some small cav and characters.

As a DE player, if I fight any of the two big infantry units, and likely any of the Knights, I'm going to lose with most things in a DE list.

So I march block the Blocks, redirect them with Cheap Harpies and/or bait with Dark Riders. I do the same to the Cav, kill the light cav, support units, etc.

Except the game becomes far less "fun" since I dictate everything movement wise and basically never engage fully. But I win.

Similar things happen against Dwarf opponents that take "balanced" lists. Send WM Hunters after the Warmachines, send something hard enough to break through the missile troops...and then don't engage anything else and take the easy 300 point win based on those relatively easy kills and table quarters. Again, relatively boring game, but you win. If I fight the blocks...I will likely get ground down and lose.

So at which point does it stop being "the smart thing to do" and start becoming "playing like a jerk"?

Well that's tactics. If you obviously can't win if you don't pull such tactics, well... what are you supposed to do? Take black dragons and dual hydras or another silly list? Or just do nothing to please your opponent and lose stupidely? Anyway, afaik, march blocking, redirecting and so on are like the basics of warhammer. You forbid me from doing that, you can remove 90% of my wins with my gobs. There's almost no way I can win with them if I don't do that.

Mercules
13-04-2009, 14:59
Here is a good example of a Jerk:

Play Skaven or some other list with a good deal of randomness like O&G.

When you win, gloat about your skill. When you loose, blame the randomness of your dice. Don't ever-ever-EVER admit your opponent outplayed you in any way... it was ALL luck, either his good, or your bad.

I will admit I once played like a Jerk.

Dwarven Warband list vrs my Ogre Warband list.

1 Cannon, and Engineer hero for the Commander, and the rest Thunderers.

I basically hid in terrain the entire 6 turns and took the draw. That was about the least fun "army" I had ever seen in a Warband.

EvC
13-04-2009, 15:04
Sorry I mean Dreadlord, I keep calling them Highborns cause I'm stuck in 6th Edition names :D

But yes, quite :p

Hell I'd have certainly charged the Dreadlord with my Lord in that case, but my Lord was busy killing the Black Guard and the Dreadlord was nowhere near him. I think you're mixing up your pansy elves ;)

Bac5665
13-04-2009, 15:10
To me, there are very few "jerky" tactics. The goblin slingshot, and the first turn bone slinky charge are both pretty iffy, but beyond that, flee, clip, maneuver to your heart's content. Such tactical movement is the heart of the game. It's why Chess skips the rest of the phases: movement is the good part. (Though it would be kick-a$$ if Chess had a magic phase!!)

But, to me and my group, being a jerk is largely based on the list you take. It's great to try and make your list more effective, and people should want to take hard lists. But there is an upper bound; you shouldn't take a list that isn't fun to play against. Now, this is very subjective, and you need to get a feel for this as a group. But no one in my group would play against 2 Stream Tanks or any Special Characters, for example. Now, in a one of pickup game, some people would play against those things, but not necessarily, and not more than one.

The list you bring should be respectful of your opponent by being challenging but fun too. I don't care (as much) if I get stomped if it was a fun game. I do mind though if I'm just watching a Bloodthirster kill my units one by one.

Meriwether
13-04-2009, 15:56
I think the biggest point here is that what Voodoo Boyz was really doing was following that oldest of tactical manuals, Sun Tzu's "The Art of War". Quite simply: only fight where you know you can win, and don't play the game on your enemy's terms.

The trick in a supposedly balanced wargame (and what makes them fun) is that both of you are going to try to do the same thing to the other -- play up your own strengths and crush them at their weaknesses.

If your army has exploitable weaknesses and you *play into that* while your opponent takes advantage of it, well, whose fault is that? (Note: this question is rhetorical).

Meri

PxDn Ninja
13-04-2009, 16:01
I have never understood fully the "Cheep list" and "Cheep Tactic" stuff I hear about a lot. The only thing I can really use as a balance is when it is basically rules whoring (Goblin Fanatic Slingshot for example). When you are taking advantage of the rules to do something that doesn't make sense for an army to do, then that is a Cheep tactic (though I'm ok if you do it, I just try to react to it).

I hear people saying the Scaven SAD is cheep, but I don't see why.

Of course, I'm a VC player so...

Kerill
13-04-2009, 16:55
I think lists only get overpowered at the point where you need a specially tailored list to counter it and an all-comers army simply stands no chance.

Beyond that, anything goes.

selone
13-04-2009, 17:51
Avian prety much sums it up for me :)

Seville
13-04-2009, 18:06
This isn't so much about the army you're fielding, but more about how you play certain matchups.

I specifically remember a tournament game with my Ogres where I was playing against a Dwarf army that was mostly Slayers (ie. 3 big blocks) with some shooting support.

I killed his core units (10 Thunderers, 10 Quarrellers, 10 Warriors), killed his Warmachines with Gorgers. And then I turned myself around and ran away from his blocks the rest of the game.

At that point I felt the need to apologize and said "Sorry dude, but if I fight you, I lose."

I had a similar feeling when I played my 'non monster list' DE against a WoC list that was lacking in the Knights department that had two blocks of Warriors/Chosen.

Never engaged their infantry, fought the combats I knew I could win and whenever he got close to a combat with a block, I just stuck a unit of Dark Riders/Harpies in front and forced him to go in another odd direction.

Granted I knew I would lose if one of those units hit just about anything in my army, and this was a tournament practice game so it was expected, but at the same time I felt like "wow, playing like this makes me feel like an ass" since I wouldn't let the guy do a whole lot all game.

VoodooBoyz -

Great topic. This is a problem I wrestle with a lot, too.

First of all - the very fact that you are concerned about it means that you are not a jerk.

Second - I don't know what the answer is. In all my years of playing wargames, I think that I have found it boils down to coming to an agreement with your opponent about what kind of game you are playing. I have a friend who likes to take "fun" stuff that just isn't competitive at all. I will also take "fun" stuff against him, and then we'll do crazy things like have our generals call each other out and face off in the middle of the table. These games are just for fun, and usually at the end of the game we neither know nor care who is ahead on VPs.

But then for pickup games, or, especially as you mentioned, tourney practice games, I think you are completely alright to do whatever it takes to win. Two chosen with two warshrines or whatever is just dumb if you are actually trying to win. If you are both going into the game with the understanding that it is to be a competitive exercise, your opponent gets what he has coming if he takes silly lists like that (and by that I don't mean you should sneer derisively as you trounce him, but, you get the idea).

So, yes, there is my answer. I usually ask my opponent before a game "is this a silly game or is it a real game?" and go from there.

Seraph74
13-04-2009, 18:42
I've had some guilty feelings myself from this same sort of situation - I tend to play maneuverable armies and do whatever I can to chose the manner of any engagements to ensure I have the edge in a given combat (Wargaming 101, yeah). I have a pretty regular group of guys I play with and it's not uncommon for me to have games that see an almost total wipe of the enemy army with losses on my side in the single digits figure-wise. And I always feel awful about it, even if a good time was had.

After a game I go out of my way to help explain where I was able to take advantage of the situation and how it can be countered in future games and in general my opponents come back harder to beat. I guess the key thing is - do these people learn from their mistakes? Everyone can have a bad game now and then; generally those are the ones we learn from best - at least, IMO.

BenTheRat
13-04-2009, 18:59
It doesn't.

If your army is all about non-engagement and shooting, magic and run away. Then ok, that can be a jerk army.

But if its about picking the right combats, and fleeing and flanking, and avoiding the stuff you just can't beat. I believe that's called being a good general.

Urgat
13-04-2009, 19:15
To me, there are very few "jerky" tactics. The goblin slingshot,

That's not tactics though, that's abusing the rules.

Bac5665
13-04-2009, 19:19
Well, that's a semantic distinction, and I'm not sure I agree with it, but I agree with you if you're saying that some tactics are so "jerky" and "abusive" that they are inherently unfair.

But I think it is a tactic, in addition to a stupid loophole.

zak
13-04-2009, 19:30
Trying to win is not the action of a jerk. Bending the rules and cheating (some may say they are the same thing) is the action of a jerk.

lparigi34
13-04-2009, 19:51
Just to add... My last game, my Empire Vs Dwarfs.

I had the upper hand since the very beginning, killed most missile troops and warmachines, the only remaining troops was a big block of Iron Breakers and another of plain warriors....

On a side note, I NEVER charge Ironbreakers, they are TOUGH, really tough. So my usual strategy is to give them some distraction and voilá (pistoliers are great for that).

So, having THAT MUCH advantage, and being my opponent a new one and not wanting to spoil the fun I charged EVERYTHING into them, units of infantry w/ detachments in the flanks, Pistoliers on the rearguard, basically all I had. Guess what... I lost!!!

So, he ended up being a jerk by celebrating a gift victory cos' i did not want to be a jerk myself... NO WAY this will happen ever again...

W0lf
13-04-2009, 21:53
I stopped playing my wood elves for this very reason.

All i did was run about, avoid, bait, redirect and pick my fights. The only combats that happened were the ones i wanted to happen and my oponents were almost helpless. I didnt lose in like 20 games and had a fair few massacres.

Playing like this sucks 100% of the fun out of the game for your opponent and that is being a jerk imo. In a friendly game i will look to make the game more fun for both involved.

I would rather charge my general and his unit into my enemies unit with general and duke it out (when odds are against me) and get a a minor victory then avoid them all game to get a major.

Tournaments are diffrent but imo massacering your opponent in a game where they had no fun is being a jerk when you could have won by less and both enjoyed the game.

EDIT: As an example of this i will play completly diffrently with my vampires vs one friends star dragon army then i will vs anothers night gobbo one.

lparigi34
13-04-2009, 22:40
And I just bought myself a Wood Elves army :cries:

Anyway, I will give it a try, as I bought them for the look and not for the power (I do really love those minis) and then try to make not so powerful lists to have fun.

But at least with WE i'd have some chance against some :cheese: guys that usually hang around my gaming group (in my last 4 games 3 lists were real annoying and blacklisted in this very forum; powergamers Daemons army, Chaos Archaon, and Thorek Gunline).

Not that I have any chance against those mentioned above with my O&G, no matter what I take.

Mireadur
13-04-2009, 22:52
Just to add... My last game, my Empire Vs Dwarfs.

I had the upper hand since the very beginning, killed most missile troops and warmachines, the only remaining troops was a big block of Iron Breakers and another of plain warriors....

On a side note, I NEVER charge Ironbreakers, they are TOUGH, really tough. So my usual strategy is to give them some distraction and voilá (pistoliers are great for that).

So, having THAT MUCH advantage, and being my opponent a new one and not wanting to spoil the fun I charged EVERYTHING into them, units of infantry w/ detachments in the flanks, Pistoliers on the rearguard, basically all I had. Guess what... I lost!!!

So, he ended up being a jerk by celebrating a gift victory cos' i did not want to be a jerk myself... NO WAY this will happen ever again...

Dont worry the tactical victory was yours since you enveloped his unit completely.. All he can claim is a dice roll fest victory :p


And I just bought myself a Wood Elves army

Anyway, I will give it a try, as I bought them for the look and not for the power (I do really love those minis) and then try to make not so powerful lists to have fun.

But at least with WE i'd have some chance against some guys that usually hang around my gaming group (in my last 4 games 3 lists were real annoying and blacklisted in this very forum; powergamers Daemons army, Chaos Archaon, and Thorek Gunline).

Not that I have any chance against those mentioned above with my O&G, no matter what I take.

I feel bad for you if you have to play often those 3 guys =). On a side note i would tell you not to worry so much about the WE, it is very truth they can be a really disheartening army for your oponent, but at the same time it requires some time and thought to masterize the army in the way Wolf did (meanwhile your friends are on your level of course).

The Red Scourge
14-04-2009, 09:48
And I just bought myself a Wood Elves army :cries:

Anyway, I will give it a try, as I bought them for the look and not for the power (I do really love those minis) and then try to make not so powerful lists to have fun.

But at least with WE i'd have some chance against some :cheese: guys that usually hang around my gaming group (in my last 4 games 3 lists were real annoying and blacklisted in this very forum; powergamers Daemons army, Chaos Archaon, and Thorek Gunline).

Not that I have any chance against those mentioned above with my O&G, no matter what I take.

Dont worry about cheesing out on woodies. You'll be hard pressed against daemons and Thorek – but you can just run from Archie :)

Besides there really aren't any really broken things with WE, it has some great tools, but it really requires tactics and patience to use them – but if/when you master them, you'll end up with 90% massacres :cheese:

Urgat
14-04-2009, 10:27
Well, that's a semantic distinction, and I'm not sure I agree with it, but I agree with you if you're saying that some tactics are so "jerky" and "abusive" that they are inherently unfair.

But I think it is a tactic, in addition to a stupid loophole.


Hmm, was thinking, maybe i'm mixing the catapult and the slingshot. The catapult (iirc) is the one where yuo throw the fanatics through your own unit to be sure to hit, while the slingshot is the one where you make a one wide lots-a-rnaks deep unit and wheel to drop the fanatic near the enemy's deployement zone, in my post.

Sometimes my bro does that: he's playing bretonians, ok, he has some bad habit of going pegs heavy and such ansty things, but, on the other hand, I can never blame it for that, coz he also plays "in the spirit" (that might be troll slayer spirit though). Even if he kbnows he's not going to win the fight, if the situation is so that knights would charge, he charges, regardless of teh consequences. We got pretty fun battles, to be honest :)

lparigi34
15-04-2009, 00:12
Hmm, was thinking, maybe i'm mixing the catapult and the slingshot. The catapult (iirc) is the one where yuo throw the fanatics through your own unit to be sure to hit, while the slingshot is the one where you make a one wide lots-a-rnaks deep unit and wheel to drop the fanatic near the enemy's deployement zone, in my post.

LOL, that is a real exploit.

I'd take that slingshot 2x next time, each w/3 fanatics. That will mean having those pesky daemons worried since the very beginning or Archie being bombed very early in the game. :evilgrin:

I´d support them with a unit of Hoppers and some suicidal squigs while keep shooting my Lobbers and Chuckas for more confusion... :D

No idea if I will win, but a helluva fun is guaranteed!!!

Dakk
15-04-2009, 06:33
Being a jerk is when you're playing for no reason other to beat the snot out of your opponent. Trying to win isn't a crime. Hell, not even taking the best daemon build ever is being a jerk. Jerkness comes when you don't really care about playing the game or having fun with your opponent, and the only enjoyment you get out of a game is seeing massacre result. That's being a jerk.

WusteGeist
15-04-2009, 09:39
If your playing a better game then the other guy, then no your not a jerk your just a better player. It's those that loose that tend to call the other guy a jerk more than anything else. At that point its no longer about if your playing nice smart or just plain better. The other guy will find fault with you no matter what and that is what will make the smarter player the so called jerk.