PDA

View Full Version : Extra Points in an Army



Pages : [1] 2

Tarian
11-09-2009, 06:24
Just a question for the community in general... how do you feel about those extra loose points in army lists? I'm talking about the 2k armies that field 2002 points, or the 1k ones that field 1010 points, things like that?

How much is acceptable? Is it ever acceptable? If you do it, why do you do it? If you don't, why don't you?

For me, it's never* acceptable. First of all, if I'm agreeing to a 2250 game, I've had to fit my list to <= 2250. Yes, it would be nice for those extra couple points, but I feel it would be cheating my opponent. Likewise, I don't like it when my opponent fields extra points, as I usually had to sacrifice something to get my army under the limit.

That being said, I do realize the point of the game is to have fun, but where's the limit? 1 point over? 20? 100? 1000? I generally find it safer to not allow any points over at all.

*Exception is if my opponent asks me for permission first... I'll usually grant it, but they'll usually earn an odd look for that.

P.S. Realized I posted in the wrong area... Background? :wtf: So I reposted it and closed the other thread... hope that was the correct procedure...

Ultimate Life Form
11-09-2009, 06:25
Not acceptable, for the very reasons you lined out.

Just like GW won't let me purchase 52€ worth of models when I only got 50€ to pay with.

Tarian
11-09-2009, 06:27
Glad to hear it ULF, I see a lot of lists in the building section or at my gaming club that fudge points a little, and I always feel a little twitch when I see that extra point sitting there.

Necromancy Black
11-09-2009, 06:34
For tournament play none over. For friendly games I usually say less then 5 points over. 5 points or more I don't like.

CraftworldsRus
11-09-2009, 06:35
I will allow anything less then 5 over in fantasy or ten in 40k. I myself keep to equal or under. I would rather play 50 pts down then 5 over.

starlight
11-09-2009, 06:39
If I can be under, so can you. :p

That said...in a friendly game, or if someone is trialling a new unit/army, I tend to be a bit more forgiving. In a tournament or pick-up game? Let's stick to the basic understandings...or will I be allowed to move 6.4" because it's *close enough*...? :eyebrows:

snurl
11-09-2009, 06:40
Somehow I don't think that 2 or 3 points are going to throw the whole game out of whack, so I don't get excited about it.

One of our players is always way over the limit anyway by doing things like saying his troops have shields when he has not actually paid the points value for them. But we beat him anyway. Kind of makes you feel good inside.

As for me, I always make my list as close to the target as possible, no more than 3 points over ever.

Unuhexium
11-09-2009, 06:42
None, period. The limit is there for a reason. I don't feel like cheating, and I expect my opponent to do so aswell.

Ultimate Life Form
11-09-2009, 06:45
It is a matter of fairness really.

For example, when I started and only had few model choices, I once had problems fudging everything I wanted into 2000 pts without exceeding the limit. As such, we agreed to increase the limit to 2020 pts, and my opponent could also buy something else with the additional points, which was a selection of new skulls for his Skull Catapult.

Alathir
11-09-2009, 06:46
Its kinda funny to see how strict some people can be, being a point or two over really isnt a big deal. Of course, this only applies to friendly games, in tournament play then you shouldn't be over. Even in friendly games my friends and I think 4 points over (at the max) is fine but anymore than that and its a bit odd.

Tarian
11-09-2009, 06:47
For me, most of my opponents that go over, go over by 3-5 points. There really isn't anything for me to field for 5 points in a HE army so agreeing to increase the point limit would either leave me where I was or make me rewrite my list... which I'm loathe to do once I see my opponent and their army.

EDIT:@ Alathir I don't know why I'm only strict on points... I let one of my opponents get a free 1/4" to their charge range just because they were close (and relatively new)... but if I see those extra points, I tend to glare menacingly at their list for a bit...

Ethriel
11-09-2009, 06:50
The only time I would say it would be acceptable is if you have two army lists together as in allies. For example if you had a doubles tournament, 2000pts split into 1000pts each...now I wouldn't have a problem if one of the armies was 1002pts and the other was 998, just as long as together they make 2000pts.
But in a straight battle, one army....never over...i made my list so it wouldn't be over, why can't you?

505
11-09-2009, 06:51
tourneys of course not (but I dont play tourneys :D) friendly games I would allow a few points not like its going to matter. but I would prefer they stay under the limit



I will allow anything less then 5 over in fantasy or ten in 40k. I myself keep to equal or under. I would rather play 50 pts down then 5 over.

I am curious as to why as 40k has so many cheap items 1point up and fantasy the cheapest (most armies) get is 8 or so.

I tend to be more strict in 40k since your hero can usually drop one point (my prince has to drop 10 in fantasy)

Skywave
11-09-2009, 07:00
When I make my list I never go over. I can't stand going over by even 1 points, and I'll wrestle with my list until I get it flush or under. That extra few points over may mean an extra soldier who gives an etra rank bonus, so I personnaly tweak my list to get what I want without going over, it would feel like cheating otherwise.

Leogun_91
11-09-2009, 07:18
*Exception is if my opponent asks me for permission first... I'll usually grant it, but they'll usually earn an odd look for that.When my oponent asks and it is about 5 or less pts I allow it but if he doesn´t ask I consider it cheating.

Avian
11-09-2009, 07:38
I don't panic when my own list is 10 pts under the limit, so I see no reason to panic if my opponent's list is 10 pts over the limit.

I have no set limit for how much over is acceptable and if my opponent asked and had a good reason he could have 100 - 200 pts more for all I care. He might be an inexperienced player, for example, in which case more points for him would make the battle more interesting for the both of us. :)

When I have run tournaments, however, I have told people who have asked that they have to adjust their lists to get them to the limit or under.

Tohellweride
11-09-2009, 07:40
In my younger days (way back in 4th) i used to allow a 5pt over spend. These days i say no. Often i will have to drop a single troop from a unit and under spend. Thats just the nature of the beast that is Warhammer.

You are 2 pts over? Sorry drop one of your cheapest troop choices. You may no longer get that rank bonus but thats just the way it goes. I dont play tournaments and i am by no means a waoc player. I play BoC for crying out loud. But its called a points limit. Not a points suggestion. :mad:

Condottiere
11-09-2009, 08:13
Five points don't matter at 2K plus; below that, it does.

The Red Scourge
11-09-2009, 08:54
I wouldn't mind if you were a few thousand points over the limit. Couldn't care less. I'd never dream of looking at your list, or even check up on you on your rolls for spells (or even ask you what lore you have before the game) or whatever else you could dream of.

I would however ridicule you and deny you any form of satisfaction (or possibly glory of victory) derived from doing any of those things. Should you massacre my troops, I'd raise my arms in victory and declare myself undisputed warmaster and master tactician – and I leave it to your own imagination to imagine how obnoxious I'd be if I won :p

Limits are fun. They're what challenges you to perform and think beyond your usual routines and ultimately evolve. That other stuff is just pure laziness :angel:

Shiodome
11-09-2009, 09:17
isn't really an issue for me, if i'm 2 points over i can drop 1 goblin and i'm 1 point under, problem solved! but don't really care if my opponent is a few points over (5 points would be my 'reasonable' limit), i would prefer it if they dropped a 2 points shield from a character to keep things under or something, but it's not game breaking *shrug*

The Clairvoyant
11-09-2009, 09:18
I always stick to the limit. But if my opponent says "i'm 5points over at the moment and need to work out what to drop", i'll tell them not to bother.
This is exactly what happened a couple of weeks ago.

I'm also the kind of person who when seeing my opponent trying to stick a unit on a hill and having them fall off, or trying to prop one side of the tray up with a dice, i just tell him to move the hill slightly so they fit.
This is what happened in that same game with the points difference.

Its perfectly reasonable to ask your opponent to drop something to make it under the limit, and i think its perfectly reasonable to just let them have the extra few points.

mrtn
11-09-2009, 09:33
I voted none. I could maybe accept it if it lead to being able to include a whole unit, but if it's only one extra soldier, then there's usually a way to lose it to be found.

Condottiere
11-09-2009, 09:33
This is more of a problem with elite armies, than horde forces.

Tokamak
11-09-2009, 09:52
NONE! ZERO! NADA! NIENTE!

Creating an army with the correct amount of points is a game on it's own. If you can't manage that, you've already lost.

Gav2k
11-09-2009, 10:40
I tend to allow =<10 points (though I only play friendly game. I played my friend's dwarves last night and he was struggling to get rid of his 15 points over. I told him i dont mind anything less than 10 points over and he managed to trim his list to only 3 points over our agreed limit.
Had a good game. I got owned but I would say that was more to do with my terrible dice-rolls than his 3 extra points.

So it's not a game breaker for me, I'll allow a few points over.

Poseidal
11-09-2009, 11:59
I usually don't mind, but I always restrict myself (so 2000, 2250 or whatever is the 'maximum' points). I think the other players that I usually play do as well though, so it's all good.

EvC
11-09-2009, 12:10
I allow my opponents to be up to 5 points over the limit when we play 1995 point games. But I call them "2000 point games" for short ;)

adamwelton
11-09-2009, 12:15
Back in the days of Rogue Trader (first ed), a GW-backed "Gentleman's agreement" in the rulebook stated that a player could go over his list points limit by 1% in order to fit in a given item. Then again back then wargear cost between 1/4 and 30 points so you could always find a way. Also armies were usually turned out at 3000 points so there was plenty of leeway. The "1% solution" has carried on in several other more recent game rules which goes to show that it was quite a good rule of thumb. Of course nowadays if you can't fit your army into "x" points limit, then you must drop something in order to field a legal list. Anything else isn't.

To quote Ultimate Life Form:

"Just like GW won't let me purchase 52€ worth of models when I only got 50€ to pay with."

This is particularly relevant and something I will be using as an example in future!

Tokamak
11-09-2009, 12:24
I don´t understand allowing extra points anyway. Saying ´I allow up to 10 extra points´ that means you´re just being very strict in your 2010 point games. Why not cut the ******** and say that you don´t allow anything over 2000?

Condottiere
11-09-2009, 12:30
Sure you can make it an absolute limit, but when you have to make up a list more or less on the spur of the moment, without time for considering which units are best optimized, it's a rather drastic solution.

The SkaerKrow
11-09-2009, 12:55
No points overage in anything but the most casual of games. If a player has actually taken the time to write up an army list beforehand, then they've had the opportunity to toy with their units enough to get in under the points cap.

Izram
11-09-2009, 12:56
None over.
Drop the musician, or that extra trailing guy. If you can't find 5 points to trim from your list, then you are min/maxing, and that type of army should be held to the strict limit.

If you are playing a small (<1000 pts) friendly game, I can understand going over. The minimum core requirment might put you over without you being able to drop anything but whole unit changes. But if you are 1-10 points over, in a 2250 point game, and you have musicians on all your units, or if you have big infantry units, why can't you drop one little guy? It is called a limit because it is a maximum. Its not a target to aim for.

Zarroc
11-09-2009, 14:24
Not acceptable, for the very reasons you lined out.

Just like GW won't let me purchase 52€ worth of models when I only got 50€ to pay with.

I agree with ULF

If your playing a 2000 point game, you never go over

If i played a game and someone attempted to go more points then where spose to, id either not play them or have them trim their list

Rules are rules after all

Urgat
11-09-2009, 14:45
I play only friends (well, mostly, played only three people who weren't people I knew) , and we've fixed the problem quite simply. I tell my opponent to make the army he wants, I ask how many points he has, and I do my army. So we play 1628 point battles or things like that, I say I got 1630 points, is that fine? and they say "yeah, no prob". If I don't know the player, I won't ask, though, I'll just remove a gob. Saves trouble.

rtunian
11-09-2009, 15:00
there is no good reason ever to be over the points limit. none. ever.
if you are over by less than 10 points, you just cut out a few infantry models.

a couple of infantry models less is not going to break any but the worst made armies, which honestly should be re-written anyway.

therat
11-09-2009, 15:21
I don´t understand allowing extra points anyway. Saying ´I allow up to 10 extra points´ that means you´re just being very strict in your 2010 point games. Why not cut the ******** and say that you don´t allow anything over 2000?

Hah, agreed. I never allow anything over the set value. A lot of you say it wouldn't matter, but I'm pretty sure I could come up with a nasty situation where that one extra goblin caused them to outnumber, win or tie combat so that they either overrun, or allow for those black orcs to flank your *insert nasty points sink which contains your general here* and wipe them out. Sure, it isn't very likely. But only you can prevent such things from happening! :D

spetswalshe
11-09-2009, 15:23
Rules is rules. I don't think many people would be happy if I asked to roll a few extra D6 of impact hits for a chariot, for example. I wouldn't have a problem if it was a friendly 'experimental' game, where the player is trying to fit in a new unit type or option that he wants to try out (eg. shields on his spearmen), as long as I get the impression that the player would let me do the same. If he's bringing the same list game after game and is always 5 points over then that is just lazy.

Saying that my local Chinese lets me pay £12.50 for a £12.70 meal so I'd probably let them get away with it (their establishment is named after every elf's favourite monstrous mount after all). The council think I owe them 51p in taxes but I probably wouldn't play them anyway because they're very WAAC and no doubt play a Flamer-heavy Tzeentch/Khorne Daemons list. I like to think the Chinese takeaway would play peasant-heavy Bretonnia, or all-mounted On'G.

Does anyone else like to imagine establishments as having a particular WHFB army?

Gav2k
11-09-2009, 15:23
Wow. Theres a LOT of devout opinions on the matter. When my mates and I play we use the points system as something to roughly get as close as possible to... Of course, we're no tournie players, and we're barely competative.
Guess it depends on your attitide to winning/losing and how competative you are.

theunwantedbeing
11-09-2009, 15:24
My regular list is usually around 50points below the limit and I'm virtually unbeaten, so I don't really see any need to be even a single point over the limit. It certainly doesnt harm my army to be 50 under, why would anyone need to be over?

I see the points limit as a currency for buying your army.
If you go to a shop to buy groceries, and your £1 short, you have to go put back £1 or more worth of goods.
Same sort of logic applies to writing an armylist.

Although I understand that not every gamer has such a well rounded list as mine and that they dont all think this way. Similarly I understand that even if I give them my calculator to add up their list faster they may still take 10+ minutes to alter their list to be within the limit.

So generally if an opponent is courteous enough to ask me if its okay that they are a few points over, I will allow it that particular time and imply that I don't want them to do it again.

TheLionReturns
11-09-2009, 15:46
I remember after taking a long break from the hobby (about 10 years) being confronted with this issue on forums and being totally shocked at the level of strictness over the points limit, and indeed the very idea that being a couple of points over is seen as cheating.

Back when I first played the tournament scene was very small and the internet community was non existent so gaming norms were very much dictated by the attitudes of your local group and what you read in white dwarf. Since white dwarf battle reports often went over the points limit this seemed like the natural thing for my group to do. We saw the points "limit" as a guide to getting roughly balanced armies, so the attitude was that a couple of points here and there would have little effect on our ability to have an enjoyable game.

I think with the growth of competitive play has fueled an attitude shift where rules are important and to be kept to strictly, rather than fudged for convenience or dramatic effect. The increased connectivity of the community through the internet has helped establish this strictness as a norm. A starting point which we can all understand and expect.

Overall this is probably a good thing. It means when playing against a new opponent, outside of your usual environment, both players know what to expect and there is less chance of misunderstanding and distrust. I personally now stick to the strict limit myself when playing new opponents as I can accept the prevailing attitude. As your can probably guess, however, I could not care less if my opponent is a few points over.

hwd
11-09-2009, 15:57
I voted less than 10 but really I think less than 5 is better. It shouldn;t be too hard to get to within less than 5 over...
Also it depends on whether the game is friendly or in a store league (we run a fantasy league every year). If it's in the league you cannot be over as with any thournament i guess

Avian
11-09-2009, 16:20
65 votes and I'm still the only one voting 10+.

Avian wins! :D

spetswalshe
11-09-2009, 16:32
Wow. Theres a LOT of devout opinions on the matter. When my mates and I play we use the points system as something to roughly get as close as possible to... Of course, we're no tournie players, and we're barely competative.
Guess it depends on your attitide to winning/losing and how competative you are.

Well, I'm assuming if you agree on a points limit, then it's already somewhat competitive. I can imagine a lot of games won't be using points limits, rather homebrew scenarios, pick-up games and the like, and a lot of people won't be using army lists at all - im my view, this is all fine and a very enjoyable way to do the hobby. However, if you agreed on a points limit before the battle and your opponent has gone to enough trouble to write up an army list it's pretty rude to just turn up with whatever. It's like playing an unpointed game but promising not to bring your Bloodthirster/Land Raider/Baneblade, but then deploying it on the table anyway. Or (a less extreme example) it's like playing an unpointed game with the models you have to hand (and have agreed given the scenario that they both seem fair), but your opponent going back home and picking up some more, unbalancing it in his favour. Sure, most people will grit their teeth and fly into the breach, but you can't fault someone for not wanting to play.

eagletsi1
11-09-2009, 16:41
Not acceptable. Your list should alway be equal to or less then the value of the game.

Even if you are just one point over, That could be an extra ogre(35 pts) or just a shield (1) .

I don't care you should play by the rules.

Tarian
11-09-2009, 16:43
Wow... was not expecting this many responses, thanks for the responses!

(And Avian is no longer the only 10+)

I agree with spetswalshe (much harder to type than I thought it would be!) that agreeing to a points limit is what irks me. If we don't agree, or we agree on a different number, that's fine. (I've fought 5k to my 2k for an outnumbered pitched battle, that was a lot of fun.) By agreeing, however, I assume you'll return the courtesy of keeping your points in check as I try to do the same.

Very interesting to read everyone's opinion on it though!

Avian
11-09-2009, 16:53
(And Avian is no longer the only 10+)
So not the single most relaxed poster, but at least one of the two most relaxed.
:D

Bac5665
11-09-2009, 17:03
I don't care as long as people agree, but if you are playing warhammer, than you can't have any points over. Once you've gone over, you've changed the game and aren't playing warhammer any more. That's fine with me. People can play what ever game they'd like. But I'm only interested in warhammer, not some basterdized version thereof. So, I would NEVER go over and still claim to be playing the same game as everyone else.

The Red Scourge
11-09-2009, 17:12
Jeez. People are petty :D

The points limits functions primarily to limit hero/special/rare choices. The armies are made with a total disregard to game balance, so fidgeting about a single points or spending time recalculating army lists instead of just having fun, rolling dice and killing grunts.

I'd still make fun of the "cheaters" who do so, but thats all in good fun :)

Draconian77
11-09-2009, 17:51
I couldn't care less if my opponent is a couple of points over the agreed upon mark. It's not like the points system is accurate...

At tournaments, you should definately stay within this limit though. Entirely different ball game! ;)

Malorian
11-09-2009, 17:53
I'm strongly in the zero points over group. There is a limits for a reason and even though those few extra points might not change much it's still over the limit.

However if an opponent shows up a point over and it's a choice between playing or waiting half an hour for him to make a new list then I'll just play the game.

I've never gone over (knowingly anyway).

yabbadabba
11-09-2009, 17:58
Not bothered in pick up games, especially with mates. Life's not balanced and I enjoy the challenge.

In tournaments and organised events, the limit is there for a reason and should be stuck to.

it's coming this way!
11-09-2009, 18:07
To be honest, in a friendly game, if the other player's a good opponent, it's not too important to me. I'm more concerned with just having a good, fun game

That said, if the game is going to count for anything (bragging rights, etc), I would say that it should be at or under the allotted points limit...

Arguleon-veq
11-09-2009, 18:09
It doesnt bother me at all within reason.

What does bother me is when people deliberatly try to take extra 100's of points for an unfair advantage.

I have played a few people who when there is no list written beforehand, will add extra magical banners to units, give them extra equipment, add in extra dispel scrolls etc. Always exactly when they need them.

In 40K I have even played people who have taken whole geared out characters over the limit. Then there are the people that miss with a Bolt Pistol and go

'Oh thats Master Crafted'
'You payed 15 points to Master Crat .... a BOLT PISTOL?'
'....Yeah...Just in case...'
'Sure'

I tend to make people writetheir list out now. As I said though they can be quite a bit over without me complaining. <50 doesnt bother me.

Keller
11-09-2009, 19:50
We're pretty lax about this sort of stuff in my group. We never check lists, though we do expect people to be at or below the limit, atleast in theory. I've fought armies that were obviously well over the limit, armies that were a few hundred shy of the limit, and everything in between. Frankly, I don't really care as long as I get to game.

Personally, I try not to go over, but will occasionally exceed by 1 or 2 points if its a sudden game of oppertunity, where I don't have a list in advance. Anymore than that and I definately cut options, which are usually weapons or armor from a character, since they tend to be the cheapest. I've had more than a couple of battles where my captain has had to go into combat armed with just a handweapon and no shield because I needed those 2 points to be under the limit.

So, what do I vote? I try to hold myself to the limit, unless its a spur-of-the-moment, but I don't care much about my opponents being so strict. I'll join the cool crowd of 10+. :cool:

loveless
11-09-2009, 19:58
No points over. You can cut something to be under, it's not that difficult. If you really really really can't, then we'll up the points value a bit.

In other words, I'm flexible, but if you're going to be over the limit, so am I...which really means that neither of us are over the limit :p

Neth
11-09-2009, 20:35
In my play group it's usually no points over. The bad thing is I usually end up needing the musician or flail etc that I cut :)

Jiggy
11-09-2009, 21:57
<10 is fine by me cause sometimes the list will just don't be the same if you have to take 19 orcs instead of 20 or not a musician on your pistoliers

Grom Wronghand
11-09-2009, 22:00
I honestly don't care. 5 points isn't going to make a big difference, and its only a game. My general imperssion of people here is that most of you are taking it a little too seriously (no offense intended).

Tokamak
11-09-2009, 22:08
Guess it depends on your attitide to winning/losing and how competative you are.

No it definitely doesn't. I just expect players to take time to consider their army and build it instead of rushing a few units on a piece of paper. Building an army is half the game for me.

I also usually play with the same army for weeks on end, perhaps something adjust something here and there and try out new things, but the core is usually the same. I NEVER tailor my army to the opponent's army. It always amazes me when I come to a club night and some guy comes over asks for a game and what army I play and then starts scribbling his army on a piece of paper.

I treat my army like a D&D character, it sounds uber geeky, but it actually creates some kind of narrative between all the games you play, no matter how random they are. It's also why I'm a big sucker for campaigns. I just like the coherence.

I play my army, not my army book.

derv
11-09-2009, 22:10
If I wanted to play a 2001 point game then that's what I'd agree with my opponent. It's not that hard to drop a single rank n file model or cheap magic item to get within the points limit.

starlight
11-09-2009, 22:10
Didn't you make up your list at home? Don't you have a bunch of lists for any armies you may happen to play?


Seriously? People show up at the (insert gaming location) without lists or gameplans? :eek:

Every army I have has multiple lists according to points level and I take the model/list combos that fit in my case when I travel... When someone says, "Hey, want to play a 2000pt game?" I respond, "Sure, here's my list, I'll start unpacking." and pull out the pre-made list. Are people seriously disrespectful enough of their opponents to wait until after the armies and points limits are agreed on before creating their lists for pickup games? :eek:

Make a list and game with it! How else are you going to learn it...? Not well if you change it every game... :(

snurl
12-09-2009, 06:04
Didn't you make up your list at home? Don't you have a bunch of lists for any armies you may happen to play?


Seriously? People show up at the (insert gaming location) without lists or gameplans? :eek:

Every army I have has multiple lists according to points level and I take the model/list combos that fit in my case when I travel... When someone says, "Hey, want to play a 2000pt game?" I respond, "Sure, here's my list, I'll start unpacking." and pull out the pre-made list. Are people seriously disrespectful enough of their opponents to wait until after the armies and points limits are agreed on before creating their lists for pickup games? :eek:

Make a list and game with it! How else are you going to learn it...? Not well if you change it every game... :(

They do it to me all the time.

Harwammer
12-09-2009, 10:42
I voted none.

If you want to be over the limit then we amend the limit.

What me and my brother used to do a decade a go is if one of us wanted to go over the points limit the other could then go twice as much over.

Onidan
12-09-2009, 10:59
Really depends on the context.

In friendly games with people I know I´ll allow 4 or less points over, but in pickup games or people I don´t know more points are a no-go. The point limit is there for a reason.

Fraggzy
12-09-2009, 11:29
In my group we allow up to 2 points over. Although it depends, if one is playing O&G and he got loads of night goblins, then he have to remove one goblin to get it under, 1 point under rather than 2 points over :D

Brothersir
12-09-2009, 11:30
I don't think there is any reason that a list should be over. If 2003 points was allowed in a 2000 point game, wouldn't we have simply agreed to a 2003 point game? The whole point in setting a point limit is to create a ceiling. Especially considering it really isn't very hard to drop your list below (ANY list that is 5 points over can drop down by removing 1 or 3 models).

"It isn't game breaking" can be said for both sides. Maybe them having that extra skink doesn't sway the game, but by that reasoning losing it shouldn't sway the game at all, either.

TeddyC
12-09-2009, 11:38
0... none at all....

If I can fit everything to 2k then so can you.

If you are really struggling let me know and we can increase it say by 10 points, allows me another single model, musician etc.

Then you have the whole issue of.... ok now we have agreed to 2001 points.... I can only do 2002.... where do you stop?

Indeed if you are a point over you can remove a musician, drop a model from a unit, take a cheaper magic item, dont give a character a shield etc....

mdauben
12-09-2009, 14:51
When I agree to play 2000 points with an opponent, that means 2000 points, not 2002 or 2007. I just don't think its unreasonable to expect a player to honor the points limit just like any other rule in the game. If a player can't move his models an extra fraction of an inch when assaulting, or add just one more die when rolling to hit, why should it be okay to add just a few more points to your army? :wtf:


Somehow I don't think that 2 or 3 points are going to throw the whole game out of whack, so I don't get excited about it.
The thing is, allowing an extra three points does not just mean the play can take another 2 or 3 points of wargear. Since he was probably stuck at 5 or ever 10 points under the limit with, that gives him greater flexibility in building and equipping his list than someone who honored the point limit. :eyebrows:


As for me, I always make my list as close to the target as possible, no more than 3 points over ever.
So, what you are really doing is playing a 2003 point game, and not a 2000 point game. You are still enforcing a limit then, so why not just use the limit you are saying you will use. No mater what limit you use there will always be more you would like add to you list, so why not just stop where you are supposed to? :confused:


If you are really struggling let me know and we can increase it say by 10 points, allows me another single model, musician etc.
I used to play with another gamer at the local shop who was constantly asking for "just 5 points over" or "just 10 points over". It got so annoying that I started writing alternate 2020pt lists so when he asked for "just 10 points over" I would say, "That's fine and oh, by the way my list is just 10 points over you, so that's okay, right?" :rolleyes:

yabbadabba
12-09-2009, 16:22
In light of all these posts, I spoke with Jervis one day and one of the things he said was that if he could go back in time, he would drop the points system and get people to play games based on what they thought was reasonable. At that time he was trying to design a way of playing without points, one of them was to get your opponent to choose your army for you. another was based on the scenarios.

Crazydu
12-09-2009, 16:38
I realised reading this post I have never checked the points of any of my opponents, so they could have been way over and I would have never known :eek: I have only played about 5 games and only against friends however. I voted for a few over - but that's based on playing friends, and I would prefer if they told me in advance to save me spending 5 years trying to work out how to take 1 less point so I was exactly on the amount we agreed to play :D And I would say only 1 or 2 over, not as much as 10! For proper competitions I would always say it should be exact, as that's all part of the skill in composing a winning army isn't it?

Condottiere
12-09-2009, 16:50
If you're playing against your friends, you shouldn't need to check their points total; if you aren't, the list should be available after the game.

arachnid
12-09-2009, 17:09
None, everyone can ditch something cheap to limbo under.

starlight
12-09-2009, 19:55
In light of all these posts, I spoke with Jervis one day and one of the things he said was that if he could go back in time, he would drop the points system and get people to play games based on what they thought was reasonable. At that time he was trying to design a way of playing without points, one of them was to get your opponent to choose your army for you. another was based on the scenarios.

I've heard this before...however the highlighted part is what causes people problems... :( Unfortunately the people in the Studio are far more reasonable and easy going than many gamers out here in the big bad world of tournaments and other scary sorts. :( Some people's ideas of what is *...reasonable...* amounts to *...whatever it takes to ensure victory...*

Scenarios/narrative games are the best solution to abandoning *points*, but as with any *best* solutions, they add a whole extra realm of complications (such as - what if your opponent doesn't have the right models for the scenario? Or what if they get tired of playing the same scenarios over and over?

The problem isn't with points per se, but with GW's support of the ultra-competitive tournament mentality where winning becomes more important than having a good time with your mates. Points are fine and good between people with the same gaming mentality, the problems start to arise when different sorts of gamers expect their opponents to behave according to unspoken conventions, rather than actually talking about their expectations.

Condottiere
12-09-2009, 21:53
The only way to ensure that both players don't miscommunicate their expectations would be if you segment them, that is, divide them into Types which explain exactly what components and units are allowed to be included in any specific Type of list, as well as their number. Then you can subdivide those as well.

selone
12-09-2009, 21:53
"but with GW's support of the ultra-competitive tournament mentality" care to explain that part?

starlight
12-09-2009, 22:07
What part don't you understand? :confused:

In the beginning 40K was designed to be a narrative game amongst mates where the story was more important than the victory. Along came the GTs and GW realised they could sell a buttload more models (their reason for existing since going public) if they used the free advertising (in WD) to drive sales of *winning* armies. This is similar to the old adage in auto racing - Win on Sunday = sales on Monday.

GW supports tournaments specifically because they (GW believes) increase sales. Gamers demand more *competitive* armies, GW hires GT champions as Game Designers...

Condottiere
12-09-2009, 22:55
When did they implement that policy?

selone
12-09-2009, 23:05
What part don't you understand? :confused:

In the beginning 40K was designed to be a narrative game amongst mates where the story was more important than the victory. Along came the GTs and GW realised they could sell a buttload more models (their reason for existing since going public) if they used the free advertising (in WD) to drive sales of *winning* armies. This is similar to the old adage in auto racing - Win on Sunday = sales on Monday.

GW supports tournaments specifically because they (GW believes) increase sales. Gamers demand more *competitive* armies, GW hires GT champions as Game Designers...

Sorry I should have been clearer, I don't understand the part where you say "but with GW's support of the ultra-competitive tournament mentality" :) perhaps we're dealing with a different GW.

Yes I remember rogue trader and 2nd ed 40K, I also remember 3rd onwards FB. Indeed there was a lot of make your own rules/scenarios type stuff and I enjoyed that, however recently GW doesn't even pretend to balance book's (for the ultra-competitive tournament player) and when they have 2 fairly balanced WFB armies fight it out in White dwarf they have so many disclaimers a lawyer would be proud (that it isn't normal to play competitively in a tournament).

How many tournaments don't try to balance the army books or make composition restrictions?

Warlord Ghazak Gazhkull
12-09-2009, 23:08
Well if it is someone who is learning the game, and has nothing else and such then I have no problems with it, I just point it out to them that it is fine for now but when they get more models it is better that they stay within the limit.

But if we test list for a tournament then I don't like it if they go 1 or 2 points over, cause with most of my list that means I could include a goblin more in the army. And if i can be within the limit then my opponent can be in the limit to.

And for massive games ( 10k or more) we don't bother to much about it we just put up what we have and if a player is 100pts over or so we use the desperate tokens like described in the legendary battle rules in a wd

Greetz

Onisuzume
12-09-2009, 23:16
Imo less than 10 is fine, as long as you can justify it by being more than 20 points under the limit otherwise with no means of upping it to less than 20 unde the limit.

Then again, I did manage to beat an army that was about 100 points over the limit (in a 500 point battle at it...).

Condottiere
13-09-2009, 00:42
Point differences are really more critical in smaller games. I don't see it matter much for a few points at above 2K.

linuvian
13-09-2009, 02:13
I'm strongly in the side of allowing my opponent to go over by less than 10, but let me clarify. If it's a tournament or league play, or some other prearranged situation, than both sides should be at or under the point limit.

If it's a pick up game with friends, and all of a sudden we decide to have a game, and say a point limit, we'll both sit down and make a list up. I would MUCH rather start playing a game against someone with a few points over, than wait and have them get under if it means rewriting their list (I'm not talking about dropping a skavenslave to get under...). We also have a house rule that if we do go over, we let the other person know before hand and they can add one trooper to one of their units (up to reaching the point total of the guy who went over, or if he can't, he can add one of his cheapest trooper). For example, if I have HE and my opponent has DE - I have 2250 exactly and my opponent has 2252. I can't add a 2 point trooper, but I can add 1 of the cheapest troops in my army - usually in this case a spearelf.

As someone else said, i also harken back to the days of the +/- 1% of the point limit as a gentleman's rule. while 1% is a bit high (22 pts in a 2250 game? that's a bit high..), I do NOT think that 10 points is going to cost me the game. And if you think your opponent having 5-10 points more than you is unfair (heck, one guy said it was a different game... geez), you have issues. Like the point system is even balanced anyways.

pssorens
13-09-2009, 02:21
I just had this situation rear it's ugly head again last week during a campaign battle. my opponent, besides not having any idea of how his codex works, was 500 points over the limit. I called him on it and he rechecked his list. removed a unit of goblins and a unit of spider riders and said the army was good. I wrote up his list and it was still over by 165 points. I've decided that I will not play him with out a third party to read and approve his list. Best part, still massacred him.

linuvian
13-09-2009, 03:32
Was he a new player? or just not caring\trying to get away with things?

Not that there is an excuse for a campaign...

Gorbad Ironclaw
13-09-2009, 07:09
Whats the point in having a point limit if you are not going to use it anyway? Do those two points or whatever really matter? Probably not, Warhammer isn't balanced anyway, but it's really about respect for your opponent. You wouldn't expect your opponent to let you cheat in the game, so why presume you can do it at the army building stage?

Now if you ask me beforehand if you can go X points over so you can try Y or something that's fine. I got no problem with that at all. It's assuming you can do it that annoys me.

Condottiere
13-09-2009, 07:14
In a one-off match between colleagues, it shouldn't matter.

In a setting such as a tournament or a campaign, that's a different story.

selone
13-09-2009, 11:55
I always stick to the points limit. My attitude towards my opponent depends on what sort of a game it is. I've let new players off in learning games with being over 50 off before but I'd expect no one to be over a point over at a tournament.

Tokamak
13-09-2009, 15:28
I'd like to argue that even in friendly matches the point limit should be maintained. Having a correct amount of points means you've put at least some thought in the construction of your army which only benefits the overall gaming experience.

Griefbringer
13-09-2009, 15:56
I would like to point out that the points limit is an agreement set mutually by the players. Thus, it would be a good thing to try to stick to it. And on the other hand, try to pick in the first place such point limit that you can actually stick to it - if you really want to play a 2347 point game, then just suggest that to your opponent.

Of course, if an opponent wants to field more points than me (for example to compensate for lack of experience or for playing a difficult army), then I do not mind allowing him a few hundred or thousand points extra - as long as they are explicitely requested for when setting the point limits.

Tokamak
13-09-2009, 16:43
And if you think your opponent having 5-10 points more than you is unfair (heck, one guy said it was a different game... geez), you have issues. Like the point system is even balanced anyways.

That's not the point. It means the opponent has one less limitation to worry about than I do. If I put the extra effort in to stay under the point limit then I can certainly expect the same from my opponent.

My current army is six points under the limit. This does not mean that I would allow my opponent to have 2256 points if I actually managed to fill up all the points to 2550.

linuvian
13-09-2009, 17:32
That's not the point. It means the opponent has one less limitation to worry about than I do. If I put the extra effort in to stay under the point limit then I can certainly expect the same from my opponent.

My current army is six points under the limit. This does not mean that I would allow my opponent to have 2256 points if I actually managed to fill up all the points to 2550.

I guess I'm more interested in having a fun time than getting my panties in a bunch over a few points. I've never even asked fro a copy of my opponents list after the game as it doesn't really matter to me. I'm there to have fun, and someone having a few more points than me isn't going to ruin that at all.

I'm not going to turn down a game if someone has a 2256 point list, let alone give him a dirty stare. I'm gonna shrug and thoroughly enjoy the game. In the long run, i'm more interested in having fun than being picky over things that, as you just said, doesn't matter. I'm not going to deny a game because my opponent isn't putting 'as much into building the army list' as I am. But, I'm also the kind of person who isn't sitting there making sure every movement and turn is 100% perfect. I'll trust my opponent to make a list and to measure movements\shooting\templates. As the 'most important rule' states - It's a game - have fun. If playing against someone with 2 points moer than you have ruins your fun, than don't play them. For me, I'm going to play as many games as i can, because I love the game.

therat
13-09-2009, 17:58
I guess I'm more interested in having a fun time than getting my panties in a bunch over a few points.



I generally agree, but it depends on the circumstance. If my friend wants to battle @ 2000 and he tells me so, I expect him to stay under 2000. If I go to the local shop & a guy has his 2006pt army, I'm all for playing.

Basically, if you know me and we agree on a limit, that's the limit. Even if you did go over, I'd probably give you a sour face, but I'd still enjoy the game.

sulla
13-09-2009, 20:47
I have a 55pt magic item in my army. How 'bout I just take that on my hero sorceress? That's only 5 pt's over her limit. Inconsequential really.;) I won't even spend over the points allowance of my army, just her. :evilgrin:

Appoloclypse
13-09-2009, 21:14
isn't really an issue for me, if i'm 2 points over i can drop 1 goblin and i'm 1 point under, problem solved! but don't really care if my opponent is a few points over (5 points would be my 'reasonable' limit), i would prefer it if they dropped a 2 points shield from a character to keep things under or something, but it's not game breaking *shrug*

i agree here 5 points or less over isn't to bad so i let it fly, tough my usual oponent and i try as hard as we can to hit the limit exactly.

samuel44
14-09-2009, 02:33
None, making the critical decision of what to drop is what its all about, prioritize, be a good tactician, its what the game is about.

Fraggzy
14-09-2009, 07:32
None, making the critical decision of what to drop is what its all about, prioritize, be a good tactician, its what the game is about.

No, the game is about having fun:D

Tokamak
14-09-2009, 09:28
If playing against someone with 2 points moer than you have ruins your fun, than don't play them. For me, I'm going to play as many games as i can, because I love the game.

AGAIN, it's not about having more points than me. It's about having points over the limit we agreed upon. If someone didn't manage to stick to the limit he clearly couldn't be bothered to put even the slightest bit of effort in his list.

So yes, playing against people who can't be bothered with that is indeed not my idea of 'fun'. To frame everything like whining over a few points is cheap, it's all about maintaining a high standard of gaming.

yabbadabba
14-09-2009, 09:36
AGAIN, it's not about having more points than me. It's about having points over the limit we agreed upon. If someone didn't manage to stick to the limit he clearly couldn't be bothered to put even the slightest bit of effort in his list.
So yes, playing against people who can't be bothered with that is indeed not my idea of 'fun'. To frame everything like whining over a few points is cheap, it's all about maintaining a high standard of gaming. Its not about maintaining a high standard of gaming. Its about having different parameters for what classifies as a good game! If it must be exactly equal points to excite and satisfy you then that is fine - but for others there are other factors that are more important.
High standard of gaming is nothing to do with it. People do this hobby for their own personal reasons. Not understanding and accepting that - even if you choose not to be a part of how they enjoy their hobby - is wrong.

Tokamak
14-09-2009, 09:41
Dude, you can say the same to the other guy. It's wrong to not accept and understand that some people chose to maintain the point limit.

It happens in every discussion, there always has to be one guy that tries to make someone look like a dogmatic dictator enforcing his regime on everyone else while all we do is discussing our preferences. What point is there in having a thread like this if we can't discuss it anyway hm? Thought so.

And AGAIN (some people clearly don't see high standards of reading comprehension as a priority) it's NOT about having exactly equal points! It's about not going over the limit! I want people to have well thought-out army lists. Going over the limit means you clearly don't have a well-thought out army list.

TrojanWolf
14-09-2009, 09:48
I generally don't mind a few points over, so long as those points aren't in a single model that doesn't need to be present or a 5pt item that isn't necessary. If say, a 7pt model takes the force one or two points over I don't care.

I generally have my army list prepared long before I need to use it, so I avoid being any points over to begin with.

yabbadabba
14-09-2009, 09:58
Dude, you can say the same to the other guy. It's wrong to not accept and understand that some people chose to maintain the point limit. That is my whole point - and actually yours too. The points/scenario etc none of it matters as long as both sides have a fun game within the parameters of what they enjoy.


What point is there in having a thread like this if we can't discuss it anyway hm? Thought so. Because you have shown no acceptance of others preferences. If I wanted to play a game within set points limits I would be happy to play you. If I wanted to play a scenario driven game where the points were not important, or maybe not even applicable, then would it be any good asking you to play? People play differently and as long as it is a choice then that is absolutely 100% fine. Intolerance isn't.


Going over the limit means you clearly don't have a well-thought out army list. No it doesn't - that just means that it is important to you, and that it is one of the success criteria for you to judge your games by.

Condottiere
14-09-2009, 10:14
It seems to turn around expectations. If you expect everyone playing to strictly adhere to a point limit, so be it, but then it's like playing competitively.

Our house rule is that five points over doesn't matter, and everyone declares their points before matches.

However, I would view that a lot stricter below 2000 points.

Tokamak
14-09-2009, 10:17
Because you have shown no acceptance of others preferences. If I wanted to play a game within set points limits I would be happy to play you. If I wanted to play a scenario driven game where the points were not important, or maybe not even applicable, then would it be any good asking you to play? People play differently and as long as it is a choice then that is absolutely 100% fine. Intolerance isn't.


Nope I would not play against that. I would consider that a waste of time. This only shows that my standards ARE actually higher than yours or anyone else that doesn't care about points limits. Anyone has no problem playing against my army because it's within the rules, refusing to play against people who tread those rules IS having a higher standard.

And I'm sorry to say, but right now it's you who's the dogmatic dictator who wants people to play against their will by not accepting intolerance.


No it doesn't - that just means that it is important to you, and that it is one of the success criteria for you to judge your games by.

No it's not a success criteria, it's a a MINIMUM criteria. It says that if an army doesn't adhere to the points limit than it already has less effort put into it than an army that does adhere to the points limit.

And for me that simply means it's not an army worth fighting against.


It seems to turn around expectations. If you expect everyone playing to strictly adhere to a point limit, so be it, but then it's like playing competitively.

I rarely play competitively, I play friendly matches with high standards (in any aspect, people who have seen me in unit filler, fully painted army, and cheese threads know what I mean). Warhammer is an expensive hobby, but totally worth it if you put the effort in to get the most out of it.

And believe me, I've had years of experience in sitting in club basements playing against unpainted armies, shoddy lists and books for terrain to see the difference.

havoc626
14-09-2009, 12:01
It used to not be an issue with me, I'd let them go over by about 10-20 points, but after having a friend pull 75pts over (more than once, too), I started being a lot stricter and saying under is the only way to go.

Griefbringer
14-09-2009, 12:58
If I wanted to play a scenario driven game where the points were not important, or maybe not even applicable, then would it be any good asking you to play?

If the scenario was interesting and well-designed: yes please!

theunwantedbeing
14-09-2009, 13:07
It seems to turn around expectations. If you expect everyone playing to strictly adhere to a point limit, so be it, but then it's like playing competitively.


That's a really terrible way of putting it.....
Your making those who stick to the limit look like the bad guys when they have done nothing wrong.

If you stick to the limit,
-there's nothing wrong with asking your opponent to do the same. You have the moral high ground here.

If you haven't stuck to the limit (through ignorance or intent)
-then there's nothing wrong with asking your opponent if its okay. Although you do not have the moral high ground here and if your opponent says no then you must abide by them.

Sticking to a limit is nothing to do with playing competitively.
Nor is asking that your opponent do the same.

Gav2k
14-09-2009, 15:00
I would consider that a waste of time. This only shows that my standards ARE actually higher than yours or anyone else that doesn't care about points limits.

I'm sorry but the amount of up-your-own-**** that these two sentences generated required me to quote them, and to say these words:
Get off your goddam high horse.

EvC
14-09-2009, 15:18
I still say we should all play 1995 point games letting people be up to 5 points over rather than 2000 point games ;)

chippyman64
14-09-2009, 15:32
and the moral of this story is to right your list to a target of 50-20 points under the actual limit- then add goodies.:)

Bac5665
14-09-2009, 15:56
If your opponent asked you to let him have 1 extra combat res, since its just a little bit more, would you let him?

This thread is about whether or not cheating is ok, albeit in a limited circumstance. Cheating is never ok with me. Sure, if you want to play a game where lots of little things are different, or with homebrewed scenarios, fine, but I hate such things. I'm a tourney player, and I like fun, tactical battles. The more the game turns on clever maneuvers and excellent placement of minis to better. Every time you change the basic rules of the game, you make it less likely that such a game can be achieved because such games require standardization.

Look, I'm all for letting people play the game they want. If you just want to roll dice and look at the pretty models, I don't care. But that's not what I'm interested in, and the rules make it very clear that I'm allowed to play my way without other players claiming the moral high ground for cheating.

yabbadabba
14-09-2009, 16:41
And I'm sorry to say, but right now it's you who's the dogmatic dictator who wants people to play against their will by not accepting intolerance. I can happily play at a points limit or within scenario restrictions. I am advocating freedom of choice, expression of will and creativity and communication in peoples hobby. I love playing people who think outside of the box as well as being perfectly able to play within the rules set. If thats being a dogmatic dictator, offering choice, then I revel in it.

Look, I'm all for letting people play the game they want. If you just want to roll dice and look at the pretty models, I don't care. But that's not what I'm interested in, and the rules make it very clear that I'm allowed to play my way without other players claiming the moral high ground for cheating.
If it makes you feel comfortable calling it cheating and it being about moral high ground then fine. I just don't see it that way.

Oh and for all you to think about plenty of WD battle reports have had a couple of extra points thrown in just because people really wanted to use a certain model. If the people who design, manufacture distribute and sell the game are a little relaxed about points sometimes shouldn't that tell us something?

dcikgyurt
14-09-2009, 16:59
I work to the basic principle that the game is supposed to be fun. If you plan a game against somebody you agree a points limit, That limit does not have to be a round number like 2000pts, if you have a 2001 point list ask your opponent if he wants to play a 2001 point game. That way you aren't over the points limit. On the other hand, if the game is a bit spur of the moment and you only have your tournament 2000pts list handy, but would really like a shield on your Lord, ask you opponent if they want to add something, but if they refuse go higher then don't start shouting and screaming, they may not have anything they want to add to their list.

Desert Rain
14-09-2009, 17:16
I think that you should stay below the points limit. If you can't you will just have to drop something, like a shield or downgrade your armour a bit.

Lord Yawgmoth
14-09-2009, 17:26
None.

If you allow 3 points over, why not play a 2003 point game.
If you allow 5 points over, why not simply play a 2005 point game.

any allowance over you have could easily just be transfered to the maximum allotment of points.

If I ask you to a 2250 point game, then i have done what i had to in order to limit myself and not go over, I expect nothing less from my opponent.

^.^ that said, if its an honest mistake I understand.


EDIT:

I still say we should all play 1995 point games letting people be up to 5 points over rather than 2000 point games ;)

EDITx2:
To Yabbadabba, it isn't so much that I really care if that their army list is a couple points over and I think that is going to make them have an advantage.... it's just the idea that we both agreed to limit ourselves to 2250 and my opponent fell short on this, you must understand this logic. Following the rules is the expectation, if you wish to be less strict in some matter or another and I know ahead of time then really I could not have a problem with this.

Tokamak
14-09-2009, 17:42
Sure honest mistakes or beginners I can live with, especially if there's not much time to play. Then again, dropping a musician or cheap model isn't too much asked is it? In the case of beginners I would have a look at their list and help them make a better one.

But still, I'm not asking people to have exactly the points limit. People are allowed to come with any army worth ANY amount of points that is not over the limit. I have not heard ONE good argument why a seasoned gamer should be allowed to have more points than the agreed limit. And no, personal attacks and arguments from authority ("WD does it too!") don't count.


I'm sorry but the amount of up-your-own-**** that these two sentences generated required me to quote them, and to say these words:
Get off your goddam high horse.

At least I can refrain from attacking people in person.


I love playing people who think outside of the box as well as being perfectly able to play within the rules set. If thats being a dogmatic dictator, offering choice, then I revel in it.

That's not what you said. You said it's WRONG to not accept that people want to play above the points limit, with other words, you HAVE to accept people playing over the points limit.

dcikgyurt
14-09-2009, 17:54
But still, I'm not asking people to have exactly the points limit. People are allowed to come with any army worth ANY amount of points that is not over the limit. I have not heard ONE good argument why a seasoned gamer should be allowed to have more points than the agreed limit. And no, personal attacks and arguments from authority ("WD does it too!") don't count.

As I said, If you want to go over the [points value then ask you opponent if you can raise the point limit of the game. If they say no, then don't do it, but the points limit is exactly that, a limit.

For those of you who don't mind an extra few points here or there, then arrange for the game to be 2005pts or whatever and just don't increase you list to compensate. But at the end of the day the limit is the limit.

yabbadabba
14-09-2009, 17:58
That's not what you said. You said it's WRONG to not accept that people want to play above the points limit, with other words, you HAVE to accept people playing over the points limit.

No I said it is wrong to be intolerant of how other people like to play this game. Please see below:


That is my whole point - and actually yours too. The points/scenario etc none of it matters as long as both sides have a fun game within the parameters of what they enjoy.

I'll say it again - and please read this, this time. If you and I played a game that was 2K points and thats it then that would be fine IF I wanted to play that way that day. I wouldn't change things at the last minute and I wouldn't come with 2 points more. If I wanted to play a scenario driven game where points were not as important, then I would play that.

This is all about choice. I defend your choice to play 2K points as much as I defend other who want to play other ways.

Condottiere
14-09-2009, 18:01
That's a really terrible way of putting it.....
Your making those who stick to the limit look like the bad guys when they have done nothing wrong.

If you stick to the limit,
-there's nothing wrong with asking your opponent to do the same. You have the moral high ground here.

If you haven't stuck to the limit (through ignorance or intent)
-then there's nothing wrong with asking your opponent if its okay. Although you do not have the moral high ground here and if your opponent says no then you must abide by them.

Sticking to a limit is nothing to do with playing competitively.
Nor is asking that your opponent do the same.Actually, I've expressed it fairly mildly, just pointing out that adhering strictly to anything in a friendly atmosphere does tend to push it to a more competitive level, and I've taken care not to be critical.

Tokamak
14-09-2009, 18:03
What scenario where points are not important are we talking about here?

And if two people meet up where one guy has too much points, then asking to simply drop some stuff from the list is a much better way to resolve than asking to play along anyway. That is my point. One guy went trough the trouble of creating a legal list, so should the other.

Insisting on playing with your army that is over the limit is what I call very, very bad form.

yabbadabba
14-09-2009, 18:11
What scenario where points are not important are we talking about here?
And if two people meet up where one guy has too much points, then asking to simply drop some stuff from the list is a much better way to resolve than asking to play along anyway. That is my point. One guy went trough the trouble of creating a legal list, so should the other.
Insisting on playing with your army that is over the limit is what I call very, very bad form.

First, there is no such thing as a legal list as no laws are being broken or adhered to.
Second there is nothing wrong with your scenario at all - something I have been advocating and something you have been missing. If someone is insisting they are right and you are wrong there is nothing wrong with saying no thanks, not today maybe another day.
And thats what I am going to do. This is pointless. You are incapable of even meeting me half way or admitting that people can have fun how they choose. This isn't a discussion - its like talking to a fanatic.

Ultimate Life Form
14-09-2009, 18:14
I really don't get why the people who like to play along the rules are the bad guys all of a sudden.

We have agreed on a points limit; now why can't I expect my opponent to be within the limit? I'm, too. In our group, (and we're not competitive players), the point limit has the status of a rule, simple as that. Rules are to be followed, that's the bottom line, and if we don't we might as well watch TV instead as it would be a waste of time. I don't understand why anyone has trouble understanding it. What if we agreed on 1999 points? Would you let me have 2000 pts instead? And would you mind me bringing that Slann along?:rolleyes:

If you have no problem with it, it's fine. But if I ask you adhere to the limit, you have no right to call me a bad sport because, as theunwantedbeing pointed out, I'm not the one who tries to cheat/get an unfair advantage/ignore the rules, you are.

Griefbringer
14-09-2009, 18:17
What scenario where points are not important are we talking about here?


Any scenario where one player provides the whole scenario (army lists, actual models, background, terrain set-up, victory conditions), and gives the opponent the choice over which side he prefers to command. If well done, such games can be very enjoyable, but require a lot more work than a simple pitched battle where each player brings his own army to the game.

Then there is the giga-apocalyptic battle of doom where you gather your gaming group and try to fit all of your painted models onto a single multi-player game of epic massiveness (probably taking better part of a whole weekend).

Griefbringer
14-09-2009, 18:23
In our group, (and we're not competitive players), the point limit has the status of a rule, simple as that. Rules are to be followed, that's the bottom line

Rules can be changed before a game by a mutual agreement between the players, and still lead to an enjoyable game. This is called house rules.

However, a previously agreed points limit is a mutual agreement between the players in the first place.

yabbadabba
14-09-2009, 18:34
If you have no problem with it, it's fine. But if I ask you adhere to the limit, you have no right to call me a bad sport because, as theunwantedbeing pointed out, I'm not the one who tries to cheat/get an unfair advantage/ignore the rules, you are.

No one is calling your, or anyone elses approach to playing the games wrong. What I'm saying is wrong is a refusal to accept that different people want to play different ways. You are not being forced to play anyway other than the way you want to play that day. If you end up with no opponents then thats might make you rethink ;)! That people want to play within or outside of the boundaries of the game isn't a problem and wanting to do more than the rules allow is often the main driver for games development.
For me, if I am playing a game outside of a formal setting like a tournament, I tend to be a little bit more relaxed about various things. Its just the way I, and many others I have played, are.

Tokamak
14-09-2009, 18:36
First, there is no such thing as a legal list as no laws are being broken or adhered to.
Second there is nothing wrong with your scenario at all - something I have been advocating and something you have been missing. If someone is insisting they are right and you are wrong there is nothing wrong with saying no thanks, not today maybe another day.
And thats what I am going to do. This is pointless. You are incapable of even meeting me half way or admitting that people can have fun how they choose. This isn't a discussion - its like talking to a fanatic.

No, that's because you framed me as the dogmatic dictator from the start. Explaining rigorously why I don't like going over points limit does not limit people from doing so in any way.They just can **** off when it comes to playing against me.

And next to that. Selecting opponents aside, I also gave reasons how staying with the points limit enhances the gaming experience.


For me, if I am playing a game outside of a formal setting like a tournament, I tend to be a little bit more relaxed about various things.

They guy refusing to drop a model to get below the points limit however, isn't relaxed at all.

RED9335
14-09-2009, 18:57
We have a guy in my Gaming group who always went over by anywhere from fifty to a hundred points, so we asked him and he said that it was hard for him to get his ogre army smaller than what he always tallied up with the models he had, so we increased from 2k to 2250 to accommodate him, then he was in the 2360 or so range, still over. I have made nasty lizardmen and VC lists that were 5, 10, 20 over and those points over were allowing me to take some nasty items or extra things, and it sucked to tone my lists down to fit the points value but i did it because its fair and right to do. Those five points may be a really nasty five points over that will haunt you for Following the points limit agreed upon, some people seem to "always" go over no matter what and i cant stand it personally.

Master Stark
14-09-2009, 19:01
What makes ME laugh is the sheer volume of "I'm not fussed about the points limit but..." posts.

I mean really, come on.

At least be honest with yourselves.

Anyone who is even using the points system has a strict limit.

It's just that for some reason, you like to keep it a little bit secret from everyone. We know that the agreed limit is 2,000 points. But is the strict limit actually 2,004? Or 2,021? More? Less? At some point you will draw the line.

My question is, why bother hiding that point? The line should be clearly drawn, for all to see, and agreed upon by all parties.

When you say "I'm not fussed about the points limit, but any more than 5 points over is too much", then what you are really saying is "I play 2,005 point games."

Drumavatic
14-09-2009, 19:05
I agree 100% that you should always have a 2000 exact or few under army, but we have to remember that everyone isnt a adult with a 10,000 p. army to choose from, sometimes you have to make compromises. Example, me and my friend usually go <10 under or 10> over because we cant just add or drop models like we like.

Tournaments are different then, if you cant Possibly make a exact 2000p. army, dont go at all, because i bet you cant do a lot of other stuff too if that seems too hard.

But always, rules are rules, and one of them is:
"The most important rule"

" Warhammer Rulebook" Remember, you're playing to enjoy a challenging battle with your friends, where having fun and keeping the spirit of the game is more important than winning at all costs. etc.

So, nothing is written in stone (exept the ancient egyptians historykrhm...back to subject) use the rules as you like.

But this is a oppinion thread (whichthis forum seems to be full of) and im not trying to be the "wise kid'do".

Shutting up!

Tokamak
14-09-2009, 19:21
It's just that for some reason, you like to keep it a little bit secret from everyone. We know that the agreed limit is 2,000 points. But is the strict limit actually 2,004? Or 2,021? More? Less? At some point you will draw the line.

My question is, why bother hiding that point? The line should be clearly drawn, for all to see, and agreed upon by all parties

Everyone has a price indeed.

The reason they keep theirs hidden is so that the look like the jolly good bunch that has no issues with anything.


"The most important rule"

Which guy is trying to win at any cost more here? The guy who sticks with the limit or the guy who refuses to drop a soldier?

I can understand that some armies are more troublesome and mean that you're likely to fall maybe ten or twenty below the points limit. But then again. If you just think about your army a bit longer there's no way you can't think up a better list.


If you end up with no opponents then thats might make you rethink ;)!

According to the above poll that's not something we have to worry about.

Drumavatic
14-09-2009, 19:54
Everyone has a price indeed.

The reason they keep theirs hidden is so that the look like the jolly good bunch that has no issues with anything.



Which guy is trying to win at any cost more here? The guy who sticks with the limit or the guy who refuses to drop a soldier?

I can understand that some armies are more troublesome and mean that you're likely to fall maybe ten or twenty below the points limit. But then again. If you just think about your army a bit longer there's no way you can't think up a better list.



According to the above poll that's not something we have to worry about.

Well yeah but that wasnt my ultimate point, which was, you dont always have to be so picky. If somebody is lazy or just cant get the army exactly 2000 it isnt such a big deal. After all its just a game. And remember, there are children starving in yugoslavia!

But im still a neutral country here eh'? Im not saying picky or lazy people are stupid, nthing personal. Just saying that... hmm... i dunno:o im tired...

To sleep

mrtn
14-09-2009, 22:52
I still say we should all play 1995 point games letting people be up to 5 points over rather than 2000 point games ;)
So, you don't like playing with Lord models then? And here I've been having more fun when running magic heavy lists with sorcerer lords... Sigh.

theunwantedbeing
14-09-2009, 23:07
So, you don't like playing with Lord models then? And here I've been having more fun when running magic heavy lists with sorcerer lords... Sigh.

Dont worry, a third(roughly) of people will seemingly have no issue whatsoever about you bringing a 2000point list (complete with lord, 2 rare and 4 special) to a 1995point game where they have no lord, only 1 rare and 3 special.

So your free to take your magic heavy list with a sorcerer lord against them.
Better yet when they kick up a fuss, you get to complain about them being over-competetive and not playing for fun.

linuvian
15-09-2009, 03:26
I really don't get why the people who like to play along the rules are the bad guys all of a sudden.


Are you kidding me? Those of use who are fine playing a 2000 pt game at 1990 - 2010 pts are the ones who are being told we're morally looser, cheaters, not even playing warhammer, and basically the scum of the earth.

Seriously - I have no problems playing a 2000 point game. If I agree to play a 2000 game with someone, I'll show up with a 2000 or less point army. If it's a spur of the moment game and my first attempt at a 'well thought out army' is 2001 points, I'll ask my opponent if it's fine. 99% of the folks I play with don't care and will let me. The 1% that do, I'll take another few minutes and get a list that he'll accept. This does not make me a cheater - it makes me want to play a game!

The people who do take extra points on purpose to try to fit extra things in are a different story, but I haven't seen ANYBODY post that that is what they do.

And those arguments about a 1995 list vs. a 2000 list, with no lords vs. a sorc lord are just full of crap. Talk about a straw man..... Feel good beating up on an argument nobody ever used??

Unwise
15-09-2009, 04:43
I never really think of a few extra points as making any sort of difference. Getting upset over it seems like 'sperging to me.

I would much prefer to play an opposing army with blocks of 20 or 25 troops rather than odd units of 24 etc. I won't begrudge them going slightly over points to get a unit looking decent on the table. (hehe maybe I am the one with a fetish for order)

Personally (and I apply this to myslef, not my opponent), I draw the line at the cost of a mount for a lord, or any magic item. There is no reason to be 10 points over, if one of your guys has a magic item worth 10 points. Same with a horse. If you would have a mess up a unit to make the points back, I don't care if you go over the limit.

zedeyejoe
15-09-2009, 08:58
Up to OK, over no.

Condottiere
15-09-2009, 09:05
I'd rather someone told me he's over the limit, than miscalculate.

snurl
15-09-2009, 09:07
I wonder if it would be OK, for example, in order to get your list UNDER 2000 points, if one of your dwarves lost his shield?

yabbadabba
15-09-2009, 09:33
I wonder if it would be OK, for example, in order to get your list UNDER 2000 points, if one of your dwarves lost his shield? I think it would have to be a character, as all models in a unit have to be armed the same way unless specifically specified.
I wonder if, following wysiwyg, your opponent can insist on you removing the shield from the model to make the army accurately reflect the list?

Tokamak
15-09-2009, 09:47
Well it's up to the player to decide what he wants to drop, so if there are strict WYSIWYG rules than he might not want to demolish one of his models but simply take a dwarf out or replace a musician.And of course all trouble can be avoided by simply triple-checking your lists.


The entire argument boils down to two statements:

"It's bad sportmanship to whine about a point more or less"

"It's bad sportmanship not to drop something out of your list to get the correct amount of points"

The question is, which is worse sportmanship than the other?

Condottiere
15-09-2009, 10:48
There's a difference running at a track meet and jogging around the park.

Tokamak
15-09-2009, 10:56
The question remains the same for friendly games.

Bac5665
15-09-2009, 16:11
I can play a friendly game of monopoly, but its not ok if i start with an extra $20. Does it make a big difference, no, but I really think most people here would have a huge problem with that, and would think its cheating.

having a few extra points in warhammer is no different in my mind.

Devon Harmon
15-09-2009, 21:18
It took me a while to formulate a response. I guess I'm still coming to grips with the realization that the game I have been playing all these years isn't Warhammer. What's worse, it turns out I've been playing this [not] Warhammer game against some cheaters!:)

Seriously, I don't really care. Perhaps I'm too busy being concerned with wheter or not my opponent's army is painted. Perhaps I'm just fortunate enough to never play against someone who has the chutzpah to bring a seriously overpointed list to an agreed upon battle. I see things such as an extra +1 CR, an extra 1/2" movement, and an extra $20 in Monoploy as being somewhat different. Feel free to try and convince me otherwise, but it is my perception based upon my belief that the points values for different models are not carved into stone and handed down from on high (not that any of those other things are either for that matter). Perhaps I would feel differently if I felt that the points values were better balanced across different armies.

All that being said, I personally don't go over the agreed upon points limit. And I've been fortunate enough to never play against someone who tried to bring more than 10 points over the limit we previously discussed.

perplexiti
15-09-2009, 21:38
Well my group and I pretty much always write lists that are under the limit, but we certainly don't stress out if someone is less than 10 points over, it's just not that big a deal to us.

Although the one tournement I went to I made sure I was under or equal.

fenrisnorth
16-09-2009, 03:36
It is actually impossible to be over the point limit in a non tournament setting as the point limit is what the player's agree to. If a player has a 2004 point army rather than a 2000, then you agree to a 2004 point game, or refuse to play at all. The only way in which it is "cheating" is if you agree to an exact limit and then secretly go over.
That being said, I seriously can't believe how anal and competitive most of the people on this thread are. A few points here or there in a multi thousand point game is negligible. I can't imagine playing with any of these people, they seem like the type to completely flip out over whether a dice is cocked or someone accidently moving a model an extra fraction of an inch, and god help you if you misremember or forget a rule.

Troah
16-09-2009, 03:41
A little over never hurt anybody. It's about having fun, not about being a point nazi.

- .- ..-
16-09-2009, 04:06
I would say that their should be a about 5 point over limit because realy how much is five points? Nothing, of course if youre below the limit then it becomes more of a problem and a person should always try to get it as close as they can

Kalec
16-09-2009, 06:03
If I can make a list at or under the points limit, so can my opponent. If he can't be bothered to do that, then I can't be bothered to play him.

Ghost-13
16-09-2009, 06:23
Normally when i play with my friends, we make up our lists right there at the spot. And ill admit to going over 1 to 2 points sometimes, but i always ask my opponent if it's ok with them first, and generally i'm ok if they go over a point or 2 aswell. However id say under 5 points, not 10.

polymphus
16-09-2009, 06:37
I say the most points a player can go over is 1pt less than the cheapest model in their army. I know some people might not like me allowing that, but if it's a friendly game I don't see why I can't be nice to my opponent, and if that one model happens to tip the whole game (:rolleyes:) then we can have a laugh about it afterwards.

Poly

Master Stark
16-09-2009, 07:06
Seriously, I don't really care

Yes, you do.

If you seriously didn't care, you wouldn't bother using points at all.

It's just that for some reason, you choose to hide your points limit from others, and keep it a secret.

Imagine you play a string of opponents, and each one asks for slightly more points over the limit than the previous one. Which opponent will you say 'no' to? The one who asks for 50 points over? The one who asks for 5,000 points over?

At what point do you decide the points don't matter at all? At what point do you decide they are just taking the ****?

And why not just make that decision before the game, and then make that the actual limit?


There's a difference running at a track meet and jogging around the park.

To continue the analogy.

You and a friend, jogging around the park, agree to a 100 metre dash. Just for fun.

Your friend says "Mind if I have a five metre head start?"

He says "Mind if I have a 20 metre head start?"

He says mind if I have a 50 metre head start?"

He says mind if I have an 80 metre head start?"

At some point the whole concept of the race becomes pointless.

This leaves us with only two questions:

1 - Where will you draw the line?

2 - Why not be upfront about that line in the first place?


i'm ok if they go over a point or 2 aswell. However id say under 5 points, not 10.

AARGGH!

Why not just set the points limit of the game ten points higher and not allow any lee-way?

Condottiere
16-09-2009, 07:19
You're assuming that the camel plans to move in with the master.

The five points are leeway. It's also known as tolerance.

Tokamak
16-09-2009, 09:14
A little over never hurt anybody. It's about having fun, not about being a point nazi.

Dropping a model from the list never hurt anybody. Stop forcing people to be a point nazi in the first place.


The five points are leeway. It's also known as tolerance.

No, the leeway is 2000 zoggin points (or any other set amount), THAT'S the leeway! 2000 points to do whatever you want with your army. How could you want even more than that? It's not tolerance, it's greedy!

The entire leeway argument is nonsense, you could have "leeways" at any other rule in warhammer and just pretend you're actually playing a game.

EvC
16-09-2009, 12:35
Hahaha, funny argument. Let's just accept it, when people who allow a leeway of x points at games of y points, they are just playing a game of x+y points. They are just not so open about it...

Master Stark
16-09-2009, 13:27
The five points are leeway. It's also known as tolerance.

There is a point where you will no longer allow leeway though. A point where you reach your limit. The points limit.

It's just that for some reason you choose to keep that limit a secret.


when people who allow a leeway of x points at games of y points, they are just playing a game of x+y points. They are just not so open about it...

Exactly.

When you have a leeway of 10 points in a 2,000 point game, you are just playing a 2,010 point game. Why not be open about it?

narrativium
16-09-2009, 13:45
You're assuming that the camel plans to move in with the master.

The five points are leeway. It's also known as tolerance.

I'll play you a 1995 point game with 5 points tolerance. Let's call it a 2K game, that gives us the leeway for lord choices.

EvC
16-09-2009, 14:35
Yeah, that's what I've been saying (except I forgot to mention that it would follow thr army selection choices for a 2K game before, as mrtn amusingly pointed out!)

Tokamak
16-09-2009, 14:47
I think the misunderstanding is in 'let's play an x point game' instead of saying 'let's play an up to x point game'

The former implies that say, 2000 points is a goal for your army to be around, going over is just as good as staying below. However, if you're talking about a limit then that means people can do anything but going over the maximum points. You are allowed 2000 whole points to base your army on, and still they need a tiny bit more. It's just really bad form.

Condottiere
16-09-2009, 14:51
Five points don't matter at 2K plus; below that, it does.
This is more of a problem with elite armies, than horde forces.

In a one-off match between colleagues, it shouldn't matter.

In a setting such as a tournament or a campaign, that's a different story.
Sure you can make it an absolute limit, but when you have to make up a list more or less on the spur of the moment, without time for considering which units are best optimized, it's a rather drastic solution.

It seems to turn around expectations. If you expect everyone playing to strictly adhere to a point limit, so be it, but then it's like playing competitively.

Our house rule is that five points over doesn't matter, and everyone declares their points before matches.

However, I would view that a lot stricter below 2000 points.
Actually, I've expressed it fairly mildly, just pointing out that adhering strictly to anything in a friendly atmosphere does tend to push it to a more competitive level, and I've taken care not to be critical. Stuff to be added as multiquote doesn't work.

EvC
16-09-2009, 14:57
But one question- what happens if someone in your group turns up with 2006 points? Do you make him drop a point (in which case you're doing the very thing that you say doesn't matter, all for the want of 1 point), or do you just get along with it (in which case, it's not a 5 point leeway, and go back and repeat this question with "2007" in place of 2006 ;) )..?

Condottiere
16-09-2009, 15:13
You're assuming malice, as well as point creep.

For us, the points stated are a target, not a sacred commandment. While we all would like to win, but why straitjacket oneself and others in a game that's supposed to be played for your enjoyment - perhaps in the next game the total is three points short of the target, perhaps not.

Would six points actually be a deal breaker? No, but it would be bad form, and time for a little revision. Could the revision be done at the target? Sure, and it should be enforced if it's a tournament. But friendly games aren't.

Tokamak
16-09-2009, 16:26
For us, the points stated are a target

See that's the main miscommunication here.

You talk about targets, we talk about limits. Targets justify leeways, limits ARE the leeway.

Devon Harmon
16-09-2009, 16:27
Yes, you do.

If you seriously didn't care, you wouldn't bother using points at all.

Perhaps what I meant was "In all seriousness, I don't really care if my opponent is a few points over the limit we agreed to play to." I used the word "seriously," not to show the degree to which I don't care, but to indicate that I was no longer jesting, as I had been previously in my post.

I find it a big leap to say that someone sould dispense with the points system all together if they are going to allow someone to be a few points over. I see the points system as a way to get two people into the same "ballpark," if you will. In my mind, part of the reason it is there is to limit special and rare choices, and require a certain number of core units, while attempting to create an overall balance between the forces on both sides of the table


It's just that for some reason, you choose to hide your points limit from others, and keep it a secret.

I don't really get what you are suggesting here. I had previously stated that I abide by whatever points limit was set.



At what point do you decide the points don't matter at all? At what point do you decide they are just taking the ****?


I guess it would depend. At some point, I would probably say something, but there are a lot of variables that I would have to consider. Is this what you mean when you say I choose to hide my points limit from others?

In practice, I have never felt the need to ask someone to reduce the size of their army. I've been fortunate enough that I've never had someone bring more than 5 points over. Those few times that has happened, I have still agreed to play. I guess I interpreted the poll as a practical question more than a theorhetical one.

Ultimate Life Form
16-09-2009, 16:31
See that's the main miscommunication here.

You talk about targets, we talk about limits. Targets justify leeways, limits ARE the leeway.

Good insight. Obviously, we are divided in two factions: Da Limitaz and Da Targetaz.

Now let's play LimitaTargeta, with lots of headbashing between the rival groups.

(Da Limitaz iz right, dem Targetaz ain't quite right in dere 'ead.)

Tokamak
16-09-2009, 19:16
Okay here goes.

Seeing a point agreement as a 'target' is still a faulty way of looking at it as it would be as bad to be under as it would to be below it. With other words, someone with 50 points below is as bad a sport as someone with 50 points over.

Fraggzy
19-09-2009, 23:00
In tournaments then points over is a no no. In a friendly game then a few points over/under dont matter. For me to bother with that extra point or 2 ina friendly game i would have to be told specificly not to go over xk points, as when i agree on say a 2k game i take it as 2k +/- 2 :D


Da Limitaz iz right, dem Targetaz ain't quite right in dere 'ead.

'ey boss, wez gona take 'dat?

Lets show 'em we iz biggezt and meanezt. doze Limitaz is up fur a clobbering

Luckywallace
20-09-2009, 09:48
I would not usually make a fuss if somebody is a few points over but I always make damn sure that I never go a point over myself.

I'm not a tournament player but going a single point over in a tournament game would of course be unacceptable.

Everybody can drop a few points here or there - loose a certain musician from your goblin unit for instance... it might hurt a bit but that is the point (pun semi-intended) of the points system.

Occulto
20-09-2009, 10:01
Remind me again why it's so hard to stick to the point limit - especially if it's one of the more common amounts (like 3000 points).

Condottiere
20-09-2009, 10:25
At 5000 points, it becomes more of a case trying to get filler, but at the 2000 points level trying to trim down your list is slightly more difficult, sometimes at 3000 points as well.

Tokamak
20-09-2009, 10:40
It's NOT difficult you trim your list at 2000 points, or even at a 500 points army. If you think it's difficult that only means you're being busy with point-pushing which proves that it's actually the person that is going over the limit that is the one making a fuss about his army list.

kardar233
21-09-2009, 06:39
To the "Limitaz", as Ultimate Life Form humourously put it:

Let's say, hypothetically, that I show up for a 1000pts game with an army consisting entirely of Chaos Warriors and their attendant Exalted Hero. Now, in order to keep as many Warriors on the field as possible, the General has no magic items or wargear, and the Warrior units are command-less. They are large units, say, 21 models per, and they use the standard setup (Halberd+Shield). How would you react if they were say, 4 points over? Would you ask them to drop a model off of a unit, making them 13 points beneath the limit, or would you ask them to drop a piece of wargear off of their units, making them 17 points under the maximum as the entire unit has to be homogeneous? Where do you draw the line at how much is too much below the limit due to your restrictions?

To take it to an extreme: What happens if it's an all-Minotaur army, with just plain Minotaurs and a Doombull? Seeing as how every model in the army is at least 50 points, would you ask them to go into battle with that level of handicap, because they can't decently take 4 points off of their list?

Note: This is not trying to be a personal attack; I'm asking a hypothetical question and simply asking what you would do in this situation.

Condottiere
21-09-2009, 06:47
As I mentioned before, this is more of a problem for elite armies, but interestingly enough, it becomes a non-issue the more points are in the scenario since there would be sufficient flexibility in shifting resources, where over-runs would be proportionately smaller in comparison.

Occulto
21-09-2009, 08:13
To the "Limitaz", as Ultimate Life Form humourously put it:

Let's say, hypothetically, that I show up for a 1000pts game with an army consisting entirely of Chaos Warriors and their attendant Exalted Hero. Now, in order to keep as many Warriors on the field as possible, the General has no magic items or wargear, and the Warrior units are command-less. They are large units, say, 21 models per, and they use the standard setup (Halberd+Shield). How would you react if they were say, 4 points over? Would you ask them to drop a model off of a unit, making them 13 points beneath the limit, or would you ask them to drop a piece of wargear off of their units, making them 17 points under the maximum as the entire unit has to be homogeneous? Where do you draw the line at how much is too much below the limit due to your restrictions?

To take it to an extreme: What happens if it's an all-Minotaur army, with just plain Minotaurs and a Doombull? Seeing as how every model in the army is at least 50 points, would you ask them to go into battle with that level of handicap, because they can't decently take 4 points off of their list?

Note: This is not trying to be a personal attack; I'm asking a hypothetical question and simply asking what you would do in this situation.

Let me start off by saying that a fixed point limit doesn't allow any situation where someone has to make the call about what's reasonable or not. That's why I think it's a good reason to adhere to the limit.

I expect my opponent to use the points as best they can and if that means that what they want leaves them with points left over, then that's not my problem.

In the cases you mentioned, it's not that a person can't use the points, it's that they don't want to use the points. Why can't they chuck a standard or muso in one of the Warrior units? Why can't they take a mark on one of the Minotaur units?

In my group we make our lists with the expectation that the limit is the limit. So if my 3000 point list stands at 2970, I don't add 35 points worth of stuff then attempt to browbeat my opponent into letting me field it.

I agree something like 5 points is not much on it's own - but I can tell you there've been times where if I'd known I could gone over, it could've meant an extra option that costs a lot more than 5 points. (Using the above example, an extra 35 points is turning one of my Heralds into a wizard. :D )

How do you think it would go down if I asked: "I couldn't actually afford this wizard, but do you mind if I still use it?" :eyebrows:

Tokamak
21-09-2009, 08:51
To the "Limitaz", as Ultimate Life Form humourously put it:

Let's say, hypothetically, that I show up for a 1000pts game with an army consisting entirely of Chaos Warriors and their attendant Exalted Hero. Now, in order to keep as many Warriors on the field as possible, the General has no magic items or wargear, and the Warrior units are command-less. They are large units, say, 21 models per, and they use the standard setup (Halberd+Shield). How would you react if they were say, 4 points over? Would you ask them to drop a model off of a unit, making them 13 points beneath the limit, or would you ask them to drop a piece of wargear off of their units, making them 17 points under the maximum as the entire unit has to be homogeneous? Where do you draw the line at how much is too much below the limit due to your restrictions?


YES 13 points under the limit is way better than 4 points over. 2000 points is not some goal to approximate, it's a limit. If you're 13 points under and you think it's a big deal, you might want to reconsider the army.


To take it to an extreme: What happens if it's an all-Minotaur army, with just plain Minotaurs and a Doombull? Seeing as how every model in the army is at least 50 points, would you ask them to go into battle with that level of handicap, because they can't decently take 4 points off of their list?

Same thing, stay under the limit. If you've got too much points left, think about your army again. Going over the limit only reveals that one hasn't thought properly about his army. And if he's holding such a strict team (not even warhounds allowed?) all the power to him, but then he'll have to accept the drawbacks as well. Having a themed army is no excuse to get privileges in the game, it kind of defeats the point of having a theme as well.


Note: This is not trying to be a personal attack; I'm asking a hypothetical question and simply asking what you would do in this situation.

It's an excellent question as it really helps conveying the point.

yabbadabba
21-09-2009, 10:28
Sorry Tokamak, you are not doing anything to win me over here. For a tournament or any kind of organised, structured play (like a campaign) I agree that the limit should be adhered too. For a lot of pick up games, particularly with people I know, a few points makes absolutely no difference. I have not seen a single argument that has convinced me that I should insist on my opponent removing models/upgrades just to adhere to a limit that was merely mentioned to set the boundaries of what the rules could cope with (and since disproved) and as a sales mechanism by GW.

That doesn't make me wrong, or a hobbyist of inferior standards, just different.

Tokamak
21-09-2009, 10:32
Why would you make an exception for a tournament?

And as you said before, a few points make no difference so why not just drop something from the list? This can lead to an army that performs a bit less, but that way it actually rewards people who stay under the points limit from the start and think their army lists trough with that in mind.

Master Stark
21-09-2009, 10:34
For a lot of pick up games, particularly with people I know, a few points makes absolutely no difference.

Yes, they do.

And you're lying to yourself if you insist they don't.

Because at some point, a few over becomes a few too many over.

You and I agree to a 2,000 point game.

So, can I be 7 points over?

What about 12?

Is 19 ok?

How about 23?

Can I be 35 points over?

Based on a whole bunch of things, you will decide at a certain point that enough is enough and that no, I cannot be any more over the limit than this.

That point where you draw the line, and decide enough is enough, is your limit.

yabbadabba
21-09-2009, 10:44
Why would you make an exception for a tournament?
And as you said before, a few points make no difference so why not just drop something from the list? This can lead to an army that performs a bit less, but that way it actually rewards people who stay under the points limit from the start and think their army lists trough with that in mind. For the tournament, I'm not setting the rules for the tournament. Tournament rulesets specifically deal with the case of points limits AND penalities for breaking those limits. Whats more, as you have paid and signed up for the tournament you have agreed to abide by the "tournament rules" - and btw not necessarily by GW's rules. I have not read anything anywhere in GW's books which declare the points set for games as an absolute, unbreakable rule. Therefore when I play pick up games I can choose how I wish to interpret the points.

So why not let the points stand. If you want to be pedantic, agree to the 2004 point game (or whatever) and decide that YOU have dropped points to stay under the limit. Your arguments work both ways mate.

yabbadabba
21-09-2009, 10:50
Yes, they do.
And you're lying to yourself if you insist they don't.
Because at some point, a few over becomes a few too many over.
You and I agree to a 2,000 point game.
So, can I be 7 points over? Yes
What about 12? Yes
Is 19 ok? Yes
How about 23? Yes
Can I be 35 points over? Yes
Based on a whole bunch of things, you will decide at a certain point that enough is enough and that no, I cannot be any more over the limit than this.
That point where you draw the line, and decide enough is enough, is your limit. If I really feel that the difference in points is enough to make the game not fun for me, then I would talk to my opponent. Find out why they need the difference. If they are reasonable then why not? I might need to negotiate a change in terrain, scenario objectives or deployment, but can't see any reason to back away from the challenge, or the potential fun.
The only deal breaker would be my opponent being unreasonable or unpleasant. I wouldn't even get my toys out of the case then. See its not the toys, the rules or the points that make the game. Its the person you play.

narrativium
21-09-2009, 10:51
If you don't know the person you're playing against, as in a tournament game or a game with someone you just met in a GW store on a Veteran's night, then it's a limit. If one or both of you are new players, or it's a game where you know the other player quite well, then the object isn't to play (say) a 2,000 point game - but instead one in which the points are roughly equal.

Someone just mentioned a 3,000 point game in which their list came to 2,970. Presumably they didn't ask their opponent to knock thirty points off their list. They aimed for the target score, came a bit short, and were okay with that. I think the troops supplied in any of the edition boxed games tend to be a few hundred points, and equal forces within around 50-100 points, so one player may technically be at an advantage but it's okay - because both players agree.

As to "is it so hard to hit the limit?" - it takes a bit of work, yes. If I pick a unit, decide its optimal size is seven models, etc., pick out troops and kit them exactly as I want them and my 2K list turns out to be 2,014 points, then I have to reshuffle. They used to have rules in Epic 40,000 to encourage players to stick with the same troop formations even if the result was an army pointed well below the target rather than fiddle with points here or there. And it may just be that if one player, making one army, came in just over points with their army, then the other player may just've done the same - and communicating this ahead of the game may mean neither of them has to shuffle and both can enjoy using the units they want to play rather than the ones the points limit forced them down to.

Set a target for the game, try to adhere to it, contact your opponent if you want to try something out for a game. If you don't know who your opponent will be before you show up, the target is an absolute limit. Simple.

Draconian77
21-09-2009, 11:09
Why would you make an exception for a tournament?



You really don't know the answer to that?

It's a trust issue.

If you're playing against friends or even regular opponents with pick up lists, you trust that they won't try to cheat you.
(As in, even if they go over, you know it's not in order to gain an unfair advantage)

At a tournament, where you normally play the more competitve players, not to mention strangers, having a limit is important because as far as you're concerned, bloke X could be of "morally questionable" character. :rolleyes:

Like I said earlier, I normally let my opponents go over, but I myself stick to the limit. I don't consider this problematic at all, especially when him dropping a model makes would ruin the look of his army. (Four 20 man blocks look nice, 3 20 man blocks and a 19 man block don't damnit! :D)

(Last game I played was against a DoC army with units arrayed in multiples of their gods sacred number, forcing him to frop a model would have been cruel...)


Its the person you play.

Agreed.

Master Stark
21-09-2009, 11:15
If I really feel that the difference in points is enough to make the game not fun for me, then I would talk to my opponent. Find out why they need the difference. If they are reasonable then why not? I might need to negotiate a change in terrain, scenario objectives or deployment, but can't see any reason to back away from the challenge, or the potential fun.

But then you're no longer playing the originally agreed to 2,000 point game. You've changed the parameters.

Which is fine, and generally the mark of a good opponent!

My point is, when you've agreed to a 2,000 point game and your opponent goes over the limit, at some point no matter how flexible you are, you decide that enough is enough, and the 2,000 point game goes out the window. Maybe you agree to play a mismatched points game, or devise another scenario, or give one side some other advantage to keep it as even as possible.

It's just that there is a clear line in the sand for everyone no matter how flexible they claim to be, where they will not allow their opponent to be any more over the limit and still play a 2,000 point game.

It's most obvious in the 'I don't care about the limit, but any more than 10 points over is too much' camp.

Occulto
21-09-2009, 12:32
Someone just mentioned a 3,000 point game in which their list came to 2,970. Presumably they didn't ask their opponent to knock thirty points off their list. They aimed for the target score, came a bit short, and were okay with that.

I missed out that whenever I'm in that situation, I'd take something that was 30 points (or less) and face the consequences, instead of taking what I'd ideally like (and be over). :p

If that means I don't get that extra rank, spell-caster, magic item or whatever, then I deal with it - just as I expect my opponent to deal with not having absolutely everything they want.

No malice is intended, it's just a case of weighing up the tough decisions that come when you build an army.

EvC
21-09-2009, 16:43
Of course context is everything. If when you say "let's play a 2000 point game" you mean, "let's play a game where we try and get our armies around 2000 points", then of course, you might let someone bring 20-30 points more without batting an eyelid. If you say 2000 points is the limit, then that's the limit. Just say what you mean!

It's not much different to other "limits" we encounter. If you tell your partner you'll see that at about 8p.m. then they probably won't mind if you get there at 8.05p.m. If you tell them you'll see them at 8p.m. because you have a train or show to catch, then you have made it into a limit- so don't be late! But do be clear: if you agree with your opponent that it's a 2000 point game, and it's not a limit but a suggestion, and they don't know in advance, then just say so! And if we're discussing a game with a limit of x points, then that's a limit. If you start saying how you prefer to play more relaxed games of "around x points", then that's fine- but not the type of game being discussed when we talk about limits.

theunwantedbeing
21-09-2009, 16:50
In the rules, the agreed game size is a limit.
So that's what you should assume somebody means when they ask to play a set amount.

Hence why people ask "do you mind if I am over?"

They know they arent supposed to be and dont feel like dropping anything, so ask if its okay.

The people at fault are those who either dont ask at all and just go over intentionally or those who arent happy about dropping points if told its not okay to be over.

Although this thread seems to be full of those 2 types of people trying to make everyone else look like the bad guy.

jthdotcom
21-09-2009, 17:03
I let people go over in certain instance. For example, A unit of Chaos Marauders, 20 strong, if my opponent has 16 points left and needs 20 points for them to have shields, I will let him go over. If its a case of say giving a character a particular item, or a standard that takes the points over, then no, they can do with a cheaper one or none at all

jthdotcom
21-09-2009, 17:05
But saying that, I always ask if its ok if I ever go over, even by 1 point, and if not I will drop something

yabbadabba
21-09-2009, 17:10
Although this thread seems to be full of those 2 types of people trying to make everyone else look like the bad guy. How, in this respect? People are entitled to insist on playing to a limit as much as people are entitled to play without exact points balance or an upper limit on the points they choose. Choice is a key driver in this hobby.

As I know you will point a finger at me here, I will clarify my position. I am happy playing with a points limit, as much as I am happy playing on open style of game. As long as I am playing someone fun its not an issue what style of game I play. I object to being told that the way I choose to interact with my opponents is wrong, and that my approach produces an inferior quality of game and that I am an inferior hobbyist by association.

Two thirds of the people on this poll insist that its a point limit. 1/3 say its a guideline. Both are right, and I respect and appreciate that.

narrativium
21-09-2009, 17:23
Then I'll clarify my response to the poll: if I'm told a game is a 2000 point game, I assume it's a limit. It's safe to do so, because I know my opponent won't complain if my list is equal to or under that value. I don't know whether he will or not if my list is over that value, and I don't want that argument with someone I don't know. If it's a target, if we're aiming for that amount but have leeway, then that information needs to be made more explicit to me. Nothing wrong with the guideline approach, except it's not the default setting.

Tokamak
21-09-2009, 19:15
People who want to play over the agreed point costs always act as if they're trapped and that they can't possibly think up any army under that amount of points. It's just nonsense, drop a model, nobody forces you to get as close to the limit as possible.

And then moving on to the 'to each their own argument'. To each their own is all fine until you run into people who have two different 'owns', like the limit vs goal issue. In this case, a limit is very clear while a goal and the amount you can deviate from it is just very arbitrary. Having a limit prevents any problems.

DarkAngelsG
21-09-2009, 20:12
I, and my local hobby shop, always allow 5 points over at most. No more. I think even in tournaments they allow 5 points over.

narrativium
21-09-2009, 20:16
Depends on the tournament. Most of the ones I attend state a points value and then penalise the player in some way if it turns out to be illegal (e.g. goes over the limit); the rest I've been to ask for army lists in advance so they can be both verified and endorsed (to curtail certain "cheesy" excesses). I haven't been to one yet which allowed any points over.

CaptainAwesome
21-09-2009, 20:28
My list tends to be written before I get to my local GW and as such I have time to make sure it is under pointed. If I turn up and ask someone to a game and hes not got a list for that point size written up I dont mind him being a bit over so we can start playing quicker.

In a tornement or pre-arranged game then its not really on.

Regards

Tokamak
21-09-2009, 20:51
Sure but that's a practical reason. Like you said, if he went over it means he didn't spent as much time on his list as you did on yours.

yabbadabba
21-09-2009, 21:52
Like you said, if he went over it means he didn't spent as much time on his list as you did on yours. No it doesn't. It means that he made the conscious decision to come with an army list he was prepared to accept.

Tokamak
21-09-2009, 22:15
He clearly didn't bother to stay under the points limit, probably too hard or too much effort or something.

yabbadabba
21-09-2009, 22:58
He clearly didn't bother to stay under the points limit, probably too hard or too much effort or something. Your attitude is disgraceful.

Tokamak
21-09-2009, 23:21
That's how I think about people who go over their limit.

Master Stark
21-09-2009, 23:25
I, and my local hobby shop, always allow 5 points over at most. No more. I think even in tournaments they allow 5 points over.

But see, that's just ridiculous. All you've done is move the limit by 5 points.

"So, we're playing a 2000 point game?"

"Yep"

"So, we'll both be bringing 2005 point armies?"

"Well, that goes without saying doesn't it?"


Your attitude is disgraceful.

I think it's just good manners to always try and get your list under the 'limit'.

If someone is over the limit, especially in a game with a stranger or someone you don't know that well, then either they haven't tried, or have tried and failed to stay under the limit.

TheSil
21-09-2009, 23:29
you know, I really have to agree with yabbadabba here

I usually field army lists on the fly, whatever suits me and seems to be an interesting game, so do my opponents. If they are 20 points over... that only means I have 20 more points to spend on anything else... if I buy something for 15 points thats good enough, what the hell
100 points difference? well, kick out that mage then and field some expandable troops instead...

when do you guys learn that there are so many ways to play this game?

I for example loathe this competitive crap and wouldn't play with anyone who plays this game only to win.
Do I think my way of playing is the only right one? I don't. I realise that there are many ways to do this, but there seem to be so many narrow minded people who think they are "right" when in truth they are not.

I don't know why I said it in this thread but someday I really needed to say that

Tokamak
21-09-2009, 23:43
when do you guys learn that there are so many ways to play this game?


There are billions of ways to play the game if you start interpreting every rule as you like.

Condottiere
21-09-2009, 23:43
Although this thread seems to be full of those 2 types of people trying to make everyone else look like the bad guy.If I'm included in this statement, I'd like to mention that I find my statements rather restrained, and it seems this is tarring with a rather wide brush.

TheSil
22-09-2009, 13:08
There are billions of ways to play the game if you start interpreting every rule as you like.

There is no rule that says "always bring a round number of points to the table".

You might put much effort into writing a list and be unwilling to change the end result but I am not. I select whatever I want to play with and if my opponent has two more chaos warriors on the table then there is always something to add or something he can remove to even things out a bit. Usually when two people spontaneously select something that is "about X points" worth, there will be a difference between 20-100 points. Now this difference can be reduced in a matter of minutes by dropping or adding a few things like models from a unit, cheap units, heros, magic items etc... when the difference is about 5 points or so then I'd say you have reached a good optimum to play but in all honesty I think 20 points wouldn't make that much of a difference anyway (apart from being half a unit of skaven slaves already ^^)

so what I'm trying to say is if you are flexible (and have the possibility) there should always be something you can do if your opponent is 20 points overdue. It has never been a problem for me

Tokamak
23-09-2009, 09:55
so what I'm trying to say is if you are flexible (and have the possibility) there should always be something you can do if your opponent is 20 points overdue. It has never been a problem for me

If you're adding to your list be cause your opponent does so as well, then one of both is flexible and the other isn't. If you agreed to a points limit, then dropping 20 points is way easier than to ask your opponent to think up something to add as well. It's plain bad form.

It's such nonsense that all the people who stick to the limit and accept others to do so as well are smeared as 'inflexible' while people who refuse to drop some points from their list are equally or even more inflexible because they're going over something both sides agreed on in the first place AND expect the other player to adapt to that.

yabbadabba
23-09-2009, 11:03
I'm out of here. This thread is not developing, things aren't being discussed and it isn't adding to my hobby and knowledge of the community. Most importantly, however, its developed into a banging-your-head-against-the-wall session.

Tokamak
23-09-2009, 12:22
Well that's indeed an empty statement if I ever saw one.

Dungeon_Lawyer
23-09-2009, 18:34
My preference is to get the points under-You dont go over, ever-Its simply not fair. People are suggesting that because the points system is wacked to begin with it does not really matter-but I would counter that going over only compounds this issue.

Building an effective armylist to a certain point value is a large aspect of the game, one should take time and care doing it and think a lot about how to maximize each and every point--
mind you Im not going to go all ballistic or anything if my opponite is over, but if they win and they are over the points limit of the game we just played....Well then they didnt win at all....they F'd up!

Im not goign to let my opponite take an extra piece in a chess game, or a team take an extra player in a sports game, or let someone take an extra $500 bill in a game of monopoly-Why would I agree to let them go over points in WH?

Condottiere
23-09-2009, 18:43
That would be the competitive aspect of the argument.

theunwantedbeing
23-09-2009, 20:13
That would be the competitive aspect of the argument.

Also, somebody who sticks to the points is less likely to break the rules in the game, so you can trust them to not cheat more than somebody who turns up with a list that is over the limit.

Tokamak
23-09-2009, 20:15
He means that the liberty of going over the points costs is an advantage by itself, aside from the fact that you're playing with more points, you also have more freedom to make your army 'fit'. Simply because you've got an extra option, going over the limit or not.

I still consider army creation a huge part of the game and shouldn't be taken lightly, whether it's friendly or competitive, gameplay is always enhanced by playing with armies you've put effort and care into.

Maine
23-09-2009, 20:30
I voted hard limit, but with a caveat... I think in the end what matters is that both opponents agree if it is a hard limit or not.

If one person comes to the table with 5 points over limit, having interpreted the size of the game as a soft limit, and the other player comes to the table having understood the point size as a hard limit, the hard-limit player may feel slighted which will sour the flavor of the game and ruin their fun.

As such it's best to ALWAYS ask your opponent if you want to go over. That's the fairest thing you can do - give notice in advance that you want to go a few points over, are they OK. It's a rule, and if you want to alter it, the onus is on you to make sure your opponent is aware of your desires.

To assume your opponent will be OK with it without asking, or to assume they think it's a soft limit too - well, you know what they say about assuming.

"Have Fun" applies to both parties. To argue anything else is selfish.

Tokamak
23-09-2009, 20:58
I voted hard limit, but with a caveat... I think in the end what matters is that both opponents agree if it is a hard limit or not.


From any 7th edition army book:

"Both players choose armies to the same agreed points total. You can spend less and will probably find it impossible to use up every last point. Most '2,000' point armies for example will be something like 1,998 or 1,999 points"

If one of the players want to deviate from the rules, then it's up to him to ask for permission. Players certainly don't need to agree whether they want a hard limit or not, the hard limit is the official version.

Batu
23-09-2009, 22:07
Typically if we are over by 2-4 points no one throws a fit. If you were over 10pts, why not just remove one soldier?

But, even at 10 I doubt anyone would throw a fit.

Maine
23-09-2009, 23:01
If one of the players want to deviate from the rules, then it's up to him to ask for permission. Players certainly don't need to agree whether they want a hard limit or not, the hard limit is the official version.

Which is pretty much what I said.

Tokamak
23-09-2009, 23:15
Typically if we are over by 2-4 points no one throws a fit. If you were over 10pts, why not just remove one soldier?

But, even at 10 I doubt anyone would throw a fit.

Now the question is, would the player in question throw a fit if I kindly asked him to adjust his list so it stays under the agreed total? And if neither of the sides give in, which one would be right? In my opinion it's the player asking to drop something from the list and no the one who is insisting on playing with an army above the agreement.

See it's too easy if you pretend only one group can throw a tantrum about this, both sides can be equally stubborn or equally flexible, in both cases we should treat both sides as equal in order to see who is in their right here.


Which is pretty much what I said.

Then I misread it, pardon me. I thought you meant that either soft as well as hard limits should be a point of agreement. I consider the hard limit the default so it would be unnecessary to reach an agreement about that in advance, but if that's what you said, never mind.

narrativium
24-09-2009, 01:28
Typically if we are over by 2-4 points no one throws a fit. If you were over 10pts, why not just remove one soldier?

But, even at 10 I doubt anyone would throw a fit.

Try removing one soldier from an Ogre army. Everything bar gnoblars is 35 points minimum.

Condottiere
24-09-2009, 07:00
This is getting circular.

If you're playing a competitive game, stick to the agreed upon limits. One player could handicap himself by playing way below it, or permitting the other to go a certain proportion above it.

If it's a friendly match, I don't know of anyone who objects if it's a little above the agreed upon limit, which might be for any number of reasons, perhaps to include a magic item.

TheSil
24-09-2009, 10:12
I think Condottiere just summoned this thread up quite nicely



I still consider army creation a huge part of the game and shouldn't be taken lightly, whether it's friendly or competitive, gameplay is always enhanced by playing with armies you've put effort and care into.

See, that's what I tried to say in the previous posts... not everyone is enthusiastic about putting much effort into such things. Not because they are lazy but because a fine-tuned army list is simply not what warhammer is about for them.
I usually don't play "a 2000 point game" I play a game with "about 2000 points worth of troops" (*). If you spontaneously create lists this way a small difference is inevitable and the only question is how far you go to even it out.
I usually tinker around until its about 5 points or less and then everything fine and the game can begin.


Its all about the expectations you put into this game. I understand that you might be disappointed if your opponent does not put as much effort into preparing as you do. I on the other hand would be equally unenthusiastic to field a spontaneous army that just seemed right to me at the moment against someone thinking for hours how he could possibly beat the crap out of me. Probably even for the same reasons - it feels a bit unfair and uneven to me. It simply seems as if we wouldn't be the ideal gaming partners for each other and that's what I meant with "playing the game in different ways"

/* which means the end result could be 2146, 2021, 1945 or anything like that. A deviation of 10% up is still normal in this case I'd say

Tokamak
24-09-2009, 16:26
If it's a friendly match, I don't know of anyone who objects if it's a little above the agreed upon limit, which might be for any number of reasons, perhaps to include a magic item.

Two equally reasonable people playing the game. The one with too many points wants to play with more points, the one with enough points wants him to adjust the list and drop something from it.

Who is in the right here?

This point is getting circular because two sides simply say both are unreasonable, but who is MORE unreasonable? Let's establish that first.


I usually don't play "a 2000 point game" I play a game with "about 2000 points worth of troops" (*) (...) which means the end result could be 2146, 2021, 1945 or anything like that. A deviation of 10% up is still normal in this case I'd say

Then why not include the 10% deviation and make it a hard line? That's another thing I don't like about this. At least a hard line is a clear rule which tells both players where they stand. A soft line isn't and so there's no way for anyone to know what would be a fair army composition.

Personally I take pride of thinking up a finely tuned army and getting the most out of the points that I've been given. Staying within the budget is a challenge. People simply grabbing more points simply defeat the, well, the point.

theunwantedbeing
24-09-2009, 16:36
but who is MORE unreasonable?

Thats an easy one, its the people who turn up over the limit wanting to stay over.

They're the ones who arent bothered about how many points they have afterall, they're playing for fun, not competitively so an additional handful of points in the form of a musician,sheild or single model somewhere just isnt an issue for them.

Them being unreasonable just doesnt make sense.

narrativium
24-09-2009, 16:49
If they were equally reasonable, either they'd have both adhered to the rulebook, or they'd both have failed to.

Tokamak
24-09-2009, 16:51
People turning up with more points are being reasonable here? Do you guys simply play without point limits? Just chuck in whatever models you can find under your bed?


If they were equally reasonable, either they'd have both adhered to the rulebook, or they'd both have failed to.

True

Condottiere
24-09-2009, 16:52
Do you consider opponents friends or rivals?

Zeuy
24-09-2009, 17:12
When I play a game against friends or rivals, I expect we are both playing by the same rules.

Tokamak
24-09-2009, 17:21
Do you consider opponents friends or rivals?

I don't play against rivals. I just really think that keeping strict rules enhances the fun for both sides. This doesn't mean I'm a rule-nazi during the game, and my own army is certainly far from cheesy. But I consider a simple thing as a point limit quite essential to how people treat their armies.

Condottiere
24-09-2009, 17:50
Then you must be playing against competitors.

killerbot
24-09-2009, 18:00
standard tornie rules i suppose would be used for this i think.

you can be any amount of points over within reason, if your opponent allows it, but they automatically gain the victory points/ kill points for the amount you are over the pre agreed amount.

at least that was my taking on it.

Sergeant Uriel Ventris
24-09-2009, 18:22
This is one of the most hilarious threads I've seen on Warseer, right up there with "Is Lying Cheating?" I've laughed so hard reading this I almost wet myself.

I wonder how many folks have to deal with these issues in real life with their gamer friends, and if they'd talk the same way they type to strangers on the Interwebs.

I find that I also enjoy the challenge of trying to come in right on the nose of the points limit, or getting as close a possible to using all the points available. I guess I see it like the Mark of Chaos video game: you have a certain amount of "gold pieces" (points) with which to spend on troops and upgrades, and you can't spend over the limit because then you're out of gold!

Keep up the hilarious posts, Warseers!

Tokamak
24-09-2009, 18:25
Then you must be playing against competitors.

Not at all, the narrative in the game is what we think is the most important thing. We reserve chess (in combination with booze) for competitive play.

I just can't agree that holding a hard rule is competitive, if anything refusing to drop a model because you weren't able to fit your list within the limit is what I call competitive.

TheSil
24-09-2009, 18:25
Then why not include the 10% deviation and make it a hard line? That's another thing I don't like about this. At least a hard line is a clear rule which tells both players where they stand. A soft line isn't and so there's no way for anyone to know what would be a fair army composition.


Because the whole point of grabbing what you want and playing with it is avoiding such a hard line. If you say "ok 2200 points then" you have in fact not changed anything. People would still have to tinker around with their lists for a long time before they reach exactly that amount and are ready to play.


About your second point I think it's not any more difficult to imagine what would be a fair army composition for "about X" points than for X points. After all, a fair army composition is more about avoiding lame army builds than having 5 points more on the table.
If you let me choose between an empire player that fields 2 steam tanks and a war altar within exactly 2000 points, or one that instead loads up with Helbarders and other state troops but is 15 points over, I gladly take the latter for a fair and entertaining game any day.

Tokamak
24-09-2009, 19:09
Well that's a matter of cheese vs non-cheese, that's a different discussion. The question is wether or not you've thought your army list through. Not being able to stay under the limit is a sign for me that the player didn't put effort into it.

And as for your hard vs soft line, you still have a limit to what you find acceptable. Nobody ever forces players to come close to the hard limit we propose, you can spent between 1 and 2000 points on your army. You're just making it fuzzy and unclear in what you can expect of players. If people want to make up an army on the go they can still chose whatever army they want and not even approach the 2000 points.

CrownAxe
24-09-2009, 23:54
the rule of thumb for i use for friendly games is that they can only go over by a value less then the cheapest thing possible in in the army book (like if the cheapest thing in an X was a 5pt instrument upgrade, then they can only go over by 4 pts or less)

WhiteKnight
25-09-2009, 02:55
I usually don't let anyone go over the amount greater than the price of their lowest model price (points wise. Ie. skaven clan rats are 5)

Condottiere
25-09-2009, 07:41
My perspective being, that Warhammer is not a Zero-Sum Game.

Tokamak
25-09-2009, 09:01
That's no reason to keep your own hard line vague. No matter how you put it, you HAVE a limit to what people can bring to the table, you're just hiding it to sound like a jolly person who doesn't care.

Maybe this gets the point across (no pun intended):

I use a soft line of zero points and allow people 2000 points over it and use the unit choices of a 2000 points game. People always forget that they can spent ANY amount within that margin. That's a huge margin and still they'll have to go over it slightly. THAT is point-pushing to the extreme.

Occulto
25-09-2009, 09:08
That's no reason to keep your own hard line vague. No matter how you put it, you HAVE a limit to what people can bring to the table, you're just hiding it to sound like a jolly person who doesn't care.

Maybe this gets the point across (no pun intended):

I use a soft line of zero points and allow people 2000 points over it and use the unit choices of a 2000 points game. People always forget that they can spent ANY amount within that margin. That's a huge margin and still they'll have to go over it slightly. THAT is point-pushing to the extreme.

Dude. Let it go.

If someone wasn't convinced after the first time, chances are they won't be convinced after the twentieth.

Tokamak
25-09-2009, 09:12
Ah yes the good old argumentum ad loco finger in auris

Condottiere
25-09-2009, 09:30
exitus acta probat

Fenrir
25-09-2009, 09:49
I don't really care. How often do people sit and check every opponents army list and make sure they've totted it up correctly?

kris.sherriff
25-09-2009, 10:07
Just a random question but what about if you ask me for a 1999 point game and say it's ok to go over points a little.
What happens when I only go over by one point but I have a lord, 4 special and 2 rare, it's only one point after all?

Kris

TheZombieSquig
25-09-2009, 16:02
It's not acceptable to go over. It's a points limit not a recommendation.

mdauben
25-09-2009, 21:28
If I wanted to play a game within set points limits I would be happy to play you. If I wanted to play a scenario driven game where the points were not important, or maybe not even applicable, then would it be any good asking you to play?
I think you are mixing apples and oranges in your argument here, yabbadabba. No one is saying "I won't play a scenario driven game where the points don't exactly match!" Scenarios and narrative games with special scenario rules and deliberatly uneven points totals can be a lot of fun and add some exciting variety to your games.

What I think the "points limiters" are saying is that if we agree to a point total, we should damn well honor it. If a group wants to as an everyday rule allow 5 points over, thats fine, becuause that is still a limit (it just means playing a 1505 limit instead of 1500 limit, etc.). Having some player just come along and say "I can't be bothered to write a list to meet the agreed to limit so I just decided on my own to go over" is IMO lazy and disrespectful of their opponent. There is always more every player would like to add to their list, but you have to draw the line somewhere. Conversly, there is no Codex which cannot produce a list that meets the normal 1500, 1750, 2000 or what ever point totals without going over. The only reason to go over is becuase you can't be bothered to think and organize a list that meets the point limits.

Tokamak
25-09-2009, 23:32
Having some player just come along and say "I can't be bothered to write a list to meet the agreed to limit so I just decided on my own to go over" is IMO lazy and disrespectful of their opponent.

And it works the other way around as well. You can keep well within the limit yourself but if you're not clear on what you find acceptable or not, players have no idea what they can or cannot do with their armies.

HunterSkunter
25-09-2009, 23:33
If I ever played a tourney, I'm sure it would be points, period. But in my games with my friends at home, if someone wants to fit a unit in but it goes a bit over, I'll allow it as long as I can match him, and my friends do the same for me and each other. Its worked out pretty well, we don't usually go over by more than 10-20 points though.

Sergeant Uriel Ventris
26-09-2009, 14:43
If I ever played a tourney, I'm sure it would be points, period. But in my games with my friends at home, if someone wants to fit a unit in but it goes a bit over, I'll allow it as long as I can match him, and my friends do the same for me and each other. Its worked out pretty well, we don't usually go over by more than 10-20 points though.

Let's see if I can do this...

That means you really have a limit of of 2010-2020. Why is that better than just sticking to 2000 points?

narrativium
26-09-2009, 14:56
For the same reason that if you decide on the spur of the moment to go and have a game of football with your mates, you don't wait until you have an even number of players. You pick sides, they might be a bit uneven, stop quibbling over the exact number of players/points, get past the selection phase, and get to the fun bit - playing.

Sergeant Uriel Ventris
26-09-2009, 16:21
For the same reason that if you decide on the spur of the moment to go and have a game of football with your mates, you don't wait until you have an even number of players. You pick sides, they might be a bit uneven, stop quibbling over the exact number of players/points, get past the selection phase, and get to the fun bit - playing.

Yeah, but the difference here is you can't cut a person out without them missing out on the fun. You CAN, however, just not include that one model, or not arm that unit with this weapon, or do what every other player seems to be able to do and make a list that is on or under 2000 points.

Sheesh, you people are acting like it's an impossible task. Yeah, maybe it's not a big deal to be over, but if that's true, it's not a big deal to be under, either.

Fraggzy
26-09-2009, 16:42
Let's see if I can do this...

That means you really have a limit of of 2010-2020. Why is that better than just sticking to 2000 points?


Why do you try to make an argument where there is none? He made a statement, that in his group they usually allow a few points over. An equal question would be why is 2000point better than 2010-2020?

As long as it is understood in his group that when they say 2k game, they mean roughly 2k, that can vary between 1990-2020. so that not only one always get those few extra points (altho that is a bit big variation in my opinion, +/- 2-3 points should be enough)

narrativium
26-09-2009, 21:55
Sheesh, you people are acting like it's an impossible task. Yeah, maybe it's not a big deal to be over, but if that's true, it's not a big deal to be under, either.

No, I'm not. I've said several times in this thread that I play the points value as a limit. However, I've also provided several reasons to justify the target point of view - there are good reasons why one in three people voted for target, not limit.

As I've said, the limit should be considered the default, if for no other reasons than it's in the rulebooks and it's considerate if you don't know who you'll be playing. But if you do know who you're playing, if you want some fun without having to go through the points-shaving rigamorale, then feel free to relax the rules a bit.

Avian
26-09-2009, 22:42
This point is getting circular because two sides simply say both are unreasonable, but who is MORE unreasonable?
As I see it, anyone who insists on having it their way in a friendly game is unreasonable (if both insist, they are both unreasonable). Anyone who is willing to let the other person have it their way is generous (if both are willing to let the other person have it their way, they are both generous).

Anyone who does not understand that the other player is different from himself and might have different preferences could do better by spending time developing his social skills rather than playing a miniature game. ;)



We can do some examples:

Example A
Setting: A game of Warhammer <----- A FRIENDLY GAME, NOT A MATTER OF LIFE AND DEATH
Player 1: I have brought a list that is 3 points over the limit and I refuse to change it. <----- UNREASONABLE
Player 2: You're going to have to change it, or I won't play against you. <------ UNREASONABLE


Example B
Setting: A game of Warhammer <----- STILL A FRIENDLY GAME, NOT A MATTER OF LIFE AND DEATH
Player 1: I have brought a list that is 3 points over the limit, but I can bring it down under the list if you give me some minutes. <----- GENEROUS
Player 2: That's fine, let's just play. <------ GENEROUS


Example C
Setting: A game of Warhammer <----- STILL A FRIENDLY GAME, NOT A MATTER OF LIFE AND DEATH
Player 1: I have brought a list that is 3 points over the limit and I refuse to change it. <----- UNREASONABLE
Player 2: That's fine, let's just play. <------ GENEROUS


I think you can guess what example D is going to be like.