View Full Version : Power Gamers: good, bad or ugly?

11-05-2005, 15:45
Ok, from what I gather almost everyone here hates power gamers. I want to know exactly what you think a power gamer is and if you like power gaming or hate it. I personally have no problem with it and I think people who complain about it should stop whining for a minuite and just figure out how to win...that simple. If you care about the game so much that you would whine about losing to a power gamer just sit down for an hour or two and write up your own power list or maybe even just a counter force. So enough about what I think...let's hear your thoughts and oppinions. (by the way, sorry if I came off as a jerk at all....I just don't like when people whine and not even try to remedy the situation.)

11-05-2005, 15:59
This is an oft repeated and now very tired subject, IMO, but, for what it's worth...

The problem people seem to have is with not having fun while they play. Facing the same unimaginative list over and over again is boring. Facing the same list that has been written wholly with manipulating the rules to squeeze out the greatest possible benefits is boring, and a form of rules lawyering. Power gamers tend to be ultra serious and pretty dull to play against.

There is also stiff opposition from those fluffy types who believe a list should accurately reflect their perception of the background or the race/army in question.. and that people who ignore the fluff (with, for example, guardian hordes) don't really get 40k.

That said, I don't mind what list I play against so long as I enjoy the game. I'd also fall into the final catagory of people who'd knock power gaming.. those who think maxed out "cheesy" lists are one trick ponies that are pretty easy to beat and terminally dull to play against.

Kommissar Wulf
11-05-2005, 16:01
I personally have no real problems with Power Gamers, or armies that are designed to win. The problem that I have is with the attitude of people who play them. The Power Gamers I've encountered don't do anything other than play the game, don't talk, just destroy armies a part at a time. As much as the game may be about winning, it's also a hobby. I don't mind losing a game, I do mind playing games with no enjoyment factor at all.

I'd happily play a Power Gamer and get obliterated by them time after time if they made things seem a bit more fun. Why bother playing someone who'd going to have an army kitted out to kill you specifically when all you want to do is have an interesting and fun game.

11-05-2005, 16:03
The problem is not that you lose, the problem is that you didn't have fun doing it. So, what is fun? Some people think a fun game is when you win, these people tend to become power gamers. Others can have fun without winning, these people are usually in the game for the whole experience, modelling, painting, fluff, etc, and want to have a varying and interesting game. Armies that are designed only with winning in mind tend to be quite boring to play against, regardless of if you win or lose. Creating a power list of your own and winning with it will be fun once or twice, top, so no point in trying to fight back, better not to play against the powergamer again.

11-05-2005, 16:17
In my opinion, a powergamer does not play to play. They play to win. Always. Their army doesn't usually have a theme, unless the units that they choose happen to have a coinciding theme. They will utilise the minimum necessary requirements before utilising to maximum capacity the units and equipment they want or need to win. In addition to this they will spend a lot of time and effort working out movement distances for assaults, and strategies to defeat any army. They compete at tournaments as if they were professionals.

A non-powergamer picks up the skills and experience whilst playing and does't mind playing narrative campaigns. They'll use the army they have before deciding what to get next.

Red out.

11-05-2005, 16:32
I'm in the game equally for playing and the hobby. I do try and think up ways to win almost all the time though. I don't enjoy being cheap or being on the verge of cheating but I like winning too.

I enjoy if I win or loose and I apreciate the skill of the person I'm playing against if they beat me. I find power gamers interesting to play against because they try and max out their points.

I view the hobby and game as seperate. I would play even if the models came painted and assembled and I would do the hobby element even if the game wasn't involved. I enjoy the game experience regardless of how it went...I have a slightly addictive personality in this aspect. But what I guess I'm trying to say is win or lose power play or not I still love this game like a child and still enjoy every second of playing it.

I get sick of "your army list is really cheap and could kick my butt because I din't make all that good of a list. I hate you and I will talk bad about you and start a club called 'I hate people who know what they are doing when they make an army list to win club' and I fart in your general direction!" If your going to play the game, you might as well be in it for the win, at least that's what I think...if not then you aren't all that zealos for the game are you? And you should probably not go to a tournament because you will say something like what you said earlier with the whole hate club thing. I enjoy it regaurdless of how it goes but victory makes the game all that more fun. (Warning: any uses of the word "you" were not directed at anyone. They are there to represent a person who whines about power gamers all the time...in fact instead of seeing the word "you" imagine a name that's not your name...like Philip McDooglson, I bet nobody is named that)

11-05-2005, 16:44
Well, we need to define what we mean by the term power gamer.

I play against some seriously competitive GT regulars. Their lists are tough as nails, and what many would consider to be cheesy or beardy. But they are played with a friendy competitive spirit by friendly people. Great fun to play against and a great challenge.

So is a power gamer simply someone who min-maxes the lists?

I don't believe so. I believe a power gamer is someone who wants to WAAC, or Win At Any Cost.

WAAC people will argue any and all questionable rules or measurements in the hope that you will simply concede the point, and grant them an advantage. They will cheat, use rubber tape measures, bend the rules, and generally be a pain in the **** to play against. These people, irrespective of their lists, are power gamers.

11-05-2005, 16:55
I'd agree with that.. all about the sprirt the game is played in and whetner or not you're bored rigid or frustrated by playing someone. I'd add that a power gamer is someone who doesn't actually enjoy playing the game in itself, they only enjoy winning.

11-05-2005, 17:09
In my opinion, a powergamer does not play to play. They play to win. Always.
That's pretty much my definition as well. A powergamer is there to win, and only to win. Even though they might be a nice guy and great fun to play against (most powergamers aren't though), if their army is so tightly chosen it squeaks when they put it on the table, they're a powergamer. WAAC players tend more towards being rules-lawyers or outright cheats, wheras powergamers will spend ages with their lists, refining and redistributing points to make it more efficient. If you could do version numbers, WAAC players might get to version 10, Powergamers might hit version 50 or higher.

Put it this way, if you had a tournament where the armies were scenario based and supplied by the organisers, powergamers wouldn't turn up, WAAC players would.

Personally, I play to win. I win if I have fun (and it's a heroic victory if my opponent does as well), whatever the result on the table top. I figure you learn a lot more from a loss than a win anyway - and I must be very knowledgable by now :D. But an outright squash teaches no one anything, a nice close battle is much better.
And if my version numbers get above 10, it's because I keep losing the list I wrote ;)

11-05-2005, 17:33
some of my best games have been when my army has been totaly masacred...

its the little events in the game that make it fun...

having your army riped to shreads is always good, aslong as you have fun doing it...

if its not fun... its well.... not fun and therefor not worth doing...

16-05-2005, 18:26
I suppose to me, you could class Powergamers as those who ruthlessly crush anything in their path. Not necessarily by cheating (then they're called "cheaters" funnily enough) but by exploiting rules loop-holes and funky quirks in army lists. In role-playing, these people get termed the meta-gamers (well they used to when I played)... They break everything down into quantified chunks to gain maximum power with minimum trade-offs. There are no quality guidelines in their gaming attitude.

If the intent of the rules is a foreign country to the powergamer, the spirit of the game is not even on the same planet. They place undying loyalty to the paper that the rule books are printed on. They presume no fault of the designers and play testers. If it's in the books, then it's fair to use.

Their lists are usually minimum unit sizes with maximum weapon power. Their big guns are powerful and plentiful. There is no need to rely on background and scenic imagery when you can get another weapon fit out for the same price.

They rely on the excuse that their opponent should be cramming the most guns into the least points, rather than following both the 'reality' of the game's settings, or just plain reality that they live in. They hide behind the mask of arms races and that that itself is how we should all play the game.

We, the huddled masses of non-powergaming, may find ways of beating the powergamer. Indeed, such is a magnanimous occassion. However, the powergamer then goes on to remove the weakness and pick up some more guns. The true goal of a powergamer seems to be, to create such a devastating army that they need not think about the game to win it - the game plays itself to the ultimate demise of the opponent.

Composition scoring is the bane of the powergamer. How dare they be told they're wrong to choose the biggest guns in the most quantity! A travesty unsurpassed. How dare that weak enemy be given more comp points! They're weak!! They deserve no pity, and they should be crushed by the might of the more powerful list. Who cares that they follow a theme that is perfectly executed? The theme is weakness. That is all that matters.

The weak deserve to play powergamers, so that they may learn the errors of their ways. Only in a spiral of numbers does this game count. There is no background not worth sacrificing to fit more awe into an army.


Real world:
- Powergamers take (Chaos & Imperial) Marine armies almost exclusively. That in itself is a problem for me (but it is best to leave it alone for this thread).
- They rarely use quirky combinations unless it squeezes the most punch into the smallest point spread. When I played nids, I would always take Genestealers - hopelessly ineffective, but they are tres cool.
- They tend to play boring games - very little tactics go into a powergamers game. It's all just following the stats on the page in front of them.
- It all starts and finishes with army design. The game is just a weird side-effect of building army lists.
- There is no background. People that play 40k seem to stick with it because of the history it's got. But then the powergamers ignore it all... Ever heard of the Index Astartes? It says that the ideal Marine unit is 10 strong. Odd that there's a lot of powergamers who use 5 man squads with Lascannon/Plasma Gun (which is a rare item in itself) combinations.
- There is no reality. So Troops are the most common soldier available to the army? Stuff that! They take as little Troops as they can, so they can fill out the reast of the points with the real hard hitters. I'm sure that every gov in the world would like to have a whole army of SAS/Black Ops/whatever but it just doesn't happen - the best training and equipment simply cannot be given to everyone in sight. Reality is a thing that will exist even in the distant future. Unless it's controlled by a powergamer, then all bets are off and we join the happy hands of cold wars.


That's my take on the situation. Don't tell me I should be playing your powergaming. I take what I see as a 'real' army, not some general's wet dream of an armed force. I don't want to see the same lists every time I play a game. That is the result of powergaming. Sure, it balances out ultimately (when everyone powergames), but think of what it loses in the process... Vast backgrounds, imagining the desperate rag-tag units trying to overcome it's foes, most of the fun.

You can have your games go stale and stupid, but I like mine the way they are.

And this goes for me too:

(Warning: any uses of the word "you" were not directed at anyone. They are there to represent a person who whines about power gamers all the time...in fact instead of seeing the word "you" imagine a name that's not your name...like Philip McDooglson, I bet nobody is named that)

16-05-2005, 18:52
For me it depends on how the play, If they are cool, laugh and generally make me enjoy getting crushed. the are good. I learned, I enjoyed type thing.

If they are generally an a## and just boring to play. They are Ugly. Does not mean I won't play them though, just means they are on the bottom of the list if it come to choices.

Just a thought, they are not the bottom of the list but one step above, they guy that is on the bottom is the guy that tell me the 6 inches he measure on his ruler is the same as the 8 inches I measured on mine.

16-05-2005, 19:12
To me, a powergamer is someone who takes the cheesiest army possible, and stringently sticks to the rules. Pour example, a Chaos 2000pt army:

Chaos Daemon Prince (General) - Mark of Khorne, Axe of Khorne, Might of Khorne, Armour of Khorne, Master of mortals - 375pts

Chaos Sorcerer with lvl 2, Staff of Katam - 170

Chaos Sorcerer with lvl 2, Power Familiar - 170

Chaos Sorcerer with lvl 2, 2 Dispel Scrolls - 170

Can't be bothered to write out the rest, but bulk it out with Warriors of Khorne, Chariots of Khorne, gribbley daemons and other Khornate nasties as you see fit :p. Oh, and throw in a unit of furies or two.

This army looks to be pretty Khrone-themed (fine by me), but with the sorcerers this goes against fluff, not to mention being tactically flexible with hardcore combat units and three tooled-up sorcerers. Basically, it can storm across the table, using the furies to take out war machines and any wizards who stray too far from their buddies, under a hail of withering magic and then engage in CC led by a tooled-up Daemon Prince. The PG would stick to the rules, constantly pointing out that it is legal :wtf:, and proceed to slam you. Or something along those lines - I'm not an expert on powergaming, as most of my friends don't powergame, and nowadays there's only a few w/h players left around here :(. But ayway, that's sorta what a Powergamer does, and personally I don't like them and try not to be one (such as using my pure Night Goblin list :p).

*EDIT* IMHO, Powergamers are ok in one respect - they're better than cheaters :p.

16-05-2005, 20:28
*points at the thread*
Look! A Hofflenosh!

I think others have pretty much summed it up. IMHO some of the worst powergamers I have seen are khorne players who take things like Obliterators in 40k or sorcerors in WHFB.

16-05-2005, 20:39
@ pullsyjr: Best post I've seen on Portent since the crash. Good work, sir! :p

16-05-2005, 22:25
It is all about the fun factor. Wow, my light Infantry Guard running at your Chaos Spacemarines trying so hard to get those krak grenades into the Rhino so... The stroy of the battle is what appeals to me. Even when I lose. But if there is no story, only dice, then we got a powergamer. The rest of my definition has been nicely summed up by the rest of the posts already here.

EDIT: Really can't stand the players who don't talk! "So, that is some pre-"
" Uh uh! No talking."


16-05-2005, 23:12
EDIT: Really can't stand the players who don't talk!

Talk about what? You can't really play without talking at all.

16-05-2005, 23:31
People who make sound effects tend to annoy me. On the power gamers front I have been wondering if I myself am a power gamer for a while now. I play in a hugely competative group with several portent and some national tournament level players who tend to use highly 'efficent lists'. This has forced me to up my level but I still only want to play against my friends.

I also tend to use a stable list against all comers and spend a lot of time helping people get their lists to work in the groups own strange environment. I try to win and I can't see a point in playing a game in which there is no hope of winning and have been known to leave games rather than get angry at my opponent. So what do you think am I an object of hate or just trying to have a laugh?

17-05-2005, 00:32
For fun I play orks. Evil suns even back when every player had goffs. These days they are more speed freek than sunz, but still, with my orks I dont think I have EVER had one decent victory. Ever. But thats the point, orks get to charge headlong into the enemy trying to 'get into them' and if they get shot up on the way and explode into flames, then all the better. It is cinematic hilarity, as I see my orks as the army of the movie sidekick. The one that dies horribly, gets blown up, steps on the landmine, or cops the bullet in the head at the last minute.

If I want to have a proper game, I go back to my 1k sons, or my own SM chapter.
And no, I dont power game with them. Marines happen to be the first army I got into way back at the end of the eighties. So I certainly dont have min maxed squads.
And I never have been tempted to do that all tactical squad army, or rhino rush.

True, I use strategy and tactics, but I am not going to simply lay down and die and let someone win. I dont do too bad in competition, but tournies aren't my thing, I prefer to play against people I like, and know that both of us are going to enjoy the time spent playing the game.

Cheating. Yes, I have seen it, and have been on the receiving end of it. In several instances, I still won the game, I like to think I am better than cheating, but it riles me up when I see it. Rubber tape measures? Well, not something I have seen. Loaded dice, moving the front model and then moving the rest of the squad further than them at the other end. Or having someone accidentally leaving a ruler on the table, or having them measure the distances between scenery during set up, to make sure it is far enough away from each piece (under old rules) and then have them paste me so bad with accurate range knowledge.

My choice of army, well, 1k sons dont have MUCH choice. its one choice, and you cant complain much about that. For my SM though, yes, I do have several ass cannon in my army, but I have two choices from HQ, elite, and fast attack, one from heavy, and three from tactical. SO I am not using an unbalanced army. Hell, I only use the predator because I have the old model and like the model. Same with my terminators, they are converted first edition plastics. (yes, am now showing the amount of time spent playing the GW games)

True, I have learnt tactics over the years of gaming, and make it hard for my opponent to win, but I like to discuss the game as it goes, finding enjoyment in tight battles, and having an ongoing narrative for my tournament army. (who in fact get sh@t on totally by close combat armies, but I like my models, so I keep them) But I like to help my opponent improve THEIR abilities as well as my own, so next time the game will be even tougher to win.

Just standing there not talking would bore me totally. I like to discuss the opponents army, paintjob, conversions, choices etc. The game itself is part of the hobby for me.

Maybe my army looks beardy, or is an old bearded cheese, but most of my stuff has lived through two editions or longer of the game, so I cant say I chose it to abuse certain rules. I dont like being called names such as this, but power gamer I am not.

I like my futile orks attempting to actually win one game after so many years. It just isnt going to happen for them. But that's cool, orks getting blown up in silly charges against imperial guard armoured companies, and getting the gretchin herded through the minefields is to me, more fun than a barrel of monkeys. As long as my opponent knows I am playing for fun, then all is good, if they are someone who is in it for the prize, or the title of second in tournament or whatever, just honestly bores me.

Sorry, a power gamer is truly one who plays to win regardless of the cost. Bearded and cheese have min maxed or have too little in the way of character from their army list. It would be like an army with the cheapest HQ possible, and all the points spent on one particular combination of units developed to do one particular tactical manevure. Like rhino rush, or similar. More abuse of the list than someone can really accept. (isnt that why some tournies started using random missions from the WHOLE list in the last edition?)

My two dollars and two cents worth. Sorry. Got carried away with my train of thought.

17-05-2005, 00:47
Yeah my group plays very competitive games with very max point potential lists. You should see how many obliterators and chaos terminators I have seen on the board in 1,500pt game.
The key though is we have fun.
I think when it comes down to it, you should make your army how you want too, and not what some one else thinks it should be. It is your money, spend it how you want.

Crazy Harborc
17-05-2005, 01:13
Power gamers and their versions of "fun armies", I avoid like the plague!! I know several PGers, I know even more players who also avoid them. Perhaps they spend their games fighting each other??

People who MUST win at any cost, in any way they can need a different hobby IMHO.

grizzly ruin
17-05-2005, 02:12
Well, we need to define what we mean by the term power gamer.

Absolutely, this discussion is hofflenosh as it is much less without any definition of the term.

I play against some seriously competitive GT regulars. Their lists are tough as nails, and what many would consider to be cheesy or beardy. But they are played with a friendy competitive spirit by friendly people. Great fun to play against and a great challenge.

I agree with the sentiment behind this.

I really don't care if you've min maxed your list, and have come to the table wanting to win. It's the personality behind it that will be the deciding factor.

WAAC people will argue any and all questionable rules or measurements in the hope that you will simply concede the point, and grant them an advantage. They will cheat, use rubber tape measures, bend the rules, and generally be a pain in the **** to play against. These people, irrespective of their lists, are power gamers.

I don't know if I'd call them powergamers or just cheaters for doing some of the stuff you've mentioned.

I'd dislike anyone who would try to argue every little point, be generally of an unpleasant disposition, and tries to twist and or cheat in any way.

Otherwise, bring on the hardest list you can devise, and let's have a good time.

On the other hand, I can't stand ultra-fluff fascists either.

Anyone who sees fit to tell me what is and what isn't fluffy about my army.

"OMFG you have 8 Daemonettes in each unit and not six in your Black Legion list!! JESUS WEEPS!!!"

You know what? Go die in a hole.

17-05-2005, 05:18
Most of my thoughts have been said already..but...i'll say something too..

I dislike power games for what has been said above, making a list that is able to smash anything without any serious though, that they don't care if the games fun, as long as they come out on top.

The other thing that drives me nuts about power gamers is their attitude. They will insist at every oppertunity that their armies aren't cheesey, just that you're army sucks. They go on at lenths about how awsome and unbeatable their army is and when someone says a way they can counter it, they smugly give you something that makes that impossible. Often this ends up with someone saying something about something in their army that they have no idea how to counter..and they walk away in a huff (i'm speaking for experance here). The attitude of smug superiority tends to come crashing down when they are beaten. Often the powergame will complain that the army that BEAT them was cheesey, or that the mission was unfair to them, being that it had random elements that they hadden't prepaired for....play the mission *Plague Zombies* from the EoT book, and they will cry.

in short, powergamers take all the fun out of it.

EDIT: Power gamers can play any army. Marines and chaos are easy to power game, Tyranids were popular under the old rules. Necrons and eldar, are pretty easy to powergame with as well, the 3 Wraithlord tagteam, or the 3 Monoliths and all warrior necron army is pretty damn hard to beat...

I'm yet to see a Power gamed tau army...but its probably due to the fact most powergame armies are based around CC....

17-05-2005, 09:13
Yeah, defining powergamers can be hard.

You ever played a game, where you wished it would end, where you couldn't stand your opponent. Ill give you an example of some contrasting games:

My first tournament ever, my crap, slap dash chaos army (was the old chaos book, before any IA or anything). I had a bit of everything, just mashed together, and a LR. My first game was against the GW cell manager for our state... He had a huge, amazingly painted (he wins an award every year for painting at Gamesday) dark eldar army, mounted entirely in raiders etc. He got the first turn, and demolished everything.... like seriously EVERYTHING in a 1500pt list bar a squad of zerkers and a lord with jumppack and powerweapon. He was almost embarressed about how poor my rolling was. Anyway, after that first turn, it got much better, the chaos lord against all expectations took down the talos, the zerkers plasma-shot down the lord's raider and killed him. The game was a write off because it was table quarters and he got all of them :) but it was very fun. He knew i was new as, and helped me work out my deployment etc, and how i was going to use the list, and i ended up ranking 20th (out of about 100).

A few years later... I'm using a well oiled 1500list at the same event as before. This time the dead-wood was cut out, the models well painted, based and converted, and i had a solid grasp of the way the game worked. My dark angel's opponent had lots of plasmaguns, loads of razorback with what i think were multimeltas, and loads of min sized squads with max plasmadeath, plus termies. Anyway, this battle was much closer, with the bloodthirster eating many dev/tac squads etc. The aim of the game was to grab an objective in the middle. He whinged all game about how far my guys could move, how good they were in assault, how chainaxes were broken (it was the first WE list, and the Bloodthirster was the OLD one). Anyway, he was a constant whinging machine, but i tried to be friendly, after i while i tried to be polite, by the end I tried to stay civil. His accusations were:
Bloodletters were broken (this is before they had powerweapons)
Zerkers were too cheap
Zerkers were too good
Chaos dreads were too good

The list went on and on. Amoung otherthings he tried to tell my i was out of assault range (there was actually 5" between the models but he said he could see better from his side, so i went over and measured it there), When my LR dropped off possessed, i lowered the ramp, cosmetically, and the ramp went into terrain, he then proceded to tell me to roll a difficult terrain test(this is after i'd moved)! Later he made me roll one because a lascannon was pointing sideways not forwards and brushed a mm into some trees!

Anyway, long story short, i won by a table quarter, but i loathed the guy. I got smashed in the first one, but it was a great game, the second one i won but i hated it. That is powergaming. If anything its trying to bend things, or even just interpreting something directly to the way the rules state, when it makes so sense. A powergamer pretends they are right, unless you shove the right page under their nose, and even then, they will go off muttering that your cheating.

If its a social game, you never want to play that person again.... ever. If its a tournament game, you give the person a 1 for sportsmanship, and as you do it, know they will be prolly giving you a 1 because you argued with them.

Wolflord Bloodangel
17-05-2005, 09:37
Good, Bad or Ugly?

Definitely Ugly. See, a power gamer isnt a bad thing really. Theyre just playing a different game to everyone else. And many people would say that a change is as good as a holiday, so I dont mind playing against Power Gamers.

See, my armies are never designed against a specific opponent... I write a list (generally if theres a tourney in a few months) and then just use that list against anything and everything I can play against... up until the tourney, when I field it, then retire it. So if I come up against a power gamer the old 'beat them at their own game' rule dosnt apply. I just try to have an enjoyable game, stay quiet when they start being pedantic (and sometimes downright offensive) over the rules and just try to make the most of it. If I have an awful time (and I will admit theres a few players around that I dont enjoy playing against) then its only 2hrs of my life gone, and theres enough players around so as to get another opponent next game. And hell, if they do want to play me again then Im more than willing to oblige, to see if I can wrangle a victory out of my troops.

Ill be honest and say that I play to win, and generally try to write army lists that will be capable of winning, but thats only if I feel the army fits in around my forces' fluff. In a game I often will pull 'sneaky' tricks, but in the end Im also willing to throw my forces into highly risky, suicidal battles, because thats what its all about.

Power gamers deserve a chance. Always try to give them the best game you can, but if you find theyve used up their chance and remain intolerable, then just dont play them! Sure you may not have a choice at tourneys, but so little is determined on win/loss these days that it hardly matters when you destroy their army comp and sportsmanship scores.

Brush your teeth
17-05-2005, 09:41
I find power gamers annoying when they use 10 terminators in a 1000 point game.
For me it makes the game boring, how do you kill them with gaurd!?!. Or when in fantasy you get a magic power for strategy rating and they dont allow you to re-roll even if were not using strategy ratings.

Lion El Jason
17-05-2005, 11:54
I go in a kinda cycle of powergaming:
When people first see my army (Which is quite fluffy IMO) they often accuse me of powergaming (I play Deathwing) but experienced players will often mention how terminators and land raiders are actually thought of as poor troops and overcosted. Once I play a few games though the accusations of powergamery start again as I have a good win record.

I agree with a lot of whats gone before in this thread but from my experience people who are good at 40k often get labeled powergamers because they win not due to cheesy armies or bad gaming manners.

For example I played my first game with the new 'nids in my club and won, the first comment back werent "well done" or "Good Game" but "Oh so GW has broken another army list then" (Not from my opponent I'll add who was very sportsmanlike but from spectators)

17-05-2005, 12:02
I cant believe that any reasonable peron would say that.......

but then again, we dont play with reasonable people do we? Everyone knows what armies the "true" powergamers play. People who play well are often labled with the same name, having played against most of El Jasons armies and seen him play against others, it is easy to se why people call him a power gamer, because he rarely looses (only to me!)

So in summation, most people who suck at the game call everyone else powergamers, whilst the real powergamers hide amongst the masses.

The Beast
17-05-2005, 13:48
I find power gamers annoying when they use 10 terminators in a 1000 point game.
For me it makes the game boring, how do you kill them with gaurd!?!.
Easy. guard are surprisingly powerful in cc against high save low toughness armies. In a 500 point game my friend brought an entire 5 man tooled up terminatore hq. (The new one with storm bolters and force weapons on each.) he deepstriked them against my guard army and flamed half a squad and got a kill with EVERY SINGLE SHOT!. So I figured he would win in a shoot out. I then proceeded to hit him with my mortar squad as he killed off all of my auto cannons. I took as many guys as possible in this game. I shot him with everything except for two of my squads which charged him to keep him from running away. In total I attacked him with 40 guys and managed to kill one terminator. they were also in rapid fire range. I managed to kill off the last four buggers after 3 turns of cc and managed to win that 3 way game. the other team was also SM.

Anyways I play nids (The guard were my friends with the Inquisitor Termies) so I usually tend to have boring games of just running at the guy. So to take away from the power gamer feel (or just that "Oh my god what are you going to do now?" sarcasm that comes from people who play against nids) I tend to make odd comments or name a monster and declare some random squad his mortal enemy. I then proceed to name his mortal enemy.

PS: I don't consider myself a power gamer since I only have 1 ht and almost always use my stealers and raveners in every game. They really help in games with an objective which I have never lost. I have never won a one on one either.

17-05-2005, 17:46
huh? Anyone?

17-05-2005, 22:33
I find power gamers annoying when they use 10 terminators in a 1000 point game.
For me it makes the game boring, how do you kill them with gaurd!?!

You just embarassed me...I use that many Terminators...but only out of necesity. I don't have too many Tactical guys...it'sa funny story. The first boxd set I bought was 5 terminators and I bought a Term. Chaplin. After that I bought 5 assault guys and captain cortez. I then inherited a small space marine force with a few assault guys and 6 terminators and about 10 tactical guys and a few devastators and 3 rinos and 1 predator. I got rid of the tanks for money to buy my Necrons...I neglect my poor space marines.

Crazy Harborc
18-05-2005, 03:52
I can handle being up against a power gamer once in a blue moon. The moon must have been blue recently, I had enough of powergaming armies. Goodbye to campaign gaming on Tuesday night at the GW store. Apparently, the GW suits decided that to use the tables you MUST be part of the campaign. Funny thing, it doesn't say WFB "Campaign" night on their event's calender.........Oh well, some of us just get together elsewhere. My table for now.

It wasn't just me tired of the three powergamers. I thought it was just me until others spoke out over the phone. Granted only a handful of us have "moved on". Not spending money in the store either. Helloooo indie stores we're baaaack!

18-05-2005, 23:01
I have to admit that I am one of the peoplewho dislike Lion el Jason's Deathwing army. The main thing that annoys me is the fact that I have to radically alter my own army in order to be able to remain competetive. If I was to field my regular list I would have no where near enough firepower to deal with 3 or 4 armour 14 vehicles. Even maxing out the AT capability of my Marine army I still feel that I don't have enough firepower to deal with a Deathwing army (I managed to take out 1 and immobilise another in our last game).
I see it as though I am being forced to 'power up' my army as it were, to be able to deal with AV14 and 2+ saves and that is something I don't like to have to do. Deathwing IMO is the most extreme army out there and is almost impossible to defeat unless you know you are going to be facing an army entierly made up out of Terminators and Landraiders.


19-05-2005, 00:00
the probelm is that 1000 pt battles are not big enough for most armies to sho of their character, most armies take ~500 points to fill teir basic requirements, meaning that the specilist armies, can be overpowering at this small points level, if you play ~1250 -1500 pts, you start to get more equipment, and extra killy power in normal armies, whilse the 'specilist armies' dont get to expand al that much....

on a side note, i dont like playing ppl who play to win, it takes the fun out of games,

i like to play, and if i die horribly, but in a comic way, i have just as much fun as winning,
ppl who power game to win, ie exploit the game, are small minded individuals that fail to see the point of the hobby!

Lion El Jason
19-05-2005, 00:21
I have to admit that I am one of the peoplewho dislike Lion el Jason's Deathwing army. The main thing that annoys me is the fact that I have to radically alter my own army in order to be able to remain competetive.

This is (Predictably) where we disagree. I differ on two points:

1 My army is beatable by any balanced army, If an army cannot beat mine then its not able to take on all comers and so isn't as balanced as you think it is;)

2 It dose't matter what armies people play with the winners get accusation of cheese. Eg Hei man s Iyanden with 3 falcons and 2 Wraithlord is rarly critisised as he loses a lot. Wills 5man scout/5tac 3x Devatator min max vanilla marine army wilt 11 missile launchers, 2 multi meltas, 1 assault cannon, 1 Plasma cannon and 2 lascannon is a bit cheesy. It only was called on after he won a game not during his 15 game losing streak...

I think cheese and power gaming do exist, but the terms are thrown around too often at effective armies that win rather than cheesy players who ignore fluff and go all out for the win, like the all vyper army or the 1500point necron list with 2 monoliths and nightbringer.

19-05-2005, 01:20
Yup we certainly disagree but our ideas of a balanced list differ. A balanced Imperial Guard list (with its Lazcannon and battlecannon) will have far less problems blowing Landraiders away than a balanced Ravenguard list will (with its assault marines).
It also has to be pointed out that both Hei man and Will are in no way good tacticians and could be seen to need to improve their list in order to compete with other armies and players in our group. It is also fair to say that I have commented to both Will and Hei man about their army compersitions as well. The fact is though that combine a superior army concept with a competent player (mixing in a bit of experience) and you can end up with an army that is exceedingly hard to beat (see Dave). When this stage is reached less and less players in the group are keen to play against the army as it is very hard to beat unless you tailor a list against it.
The problem with a Deathwing army is the fact that there is very little variation. Nearly every battle there are Landraiders with terminator squads in them. If the battle is smaller remove a Landraider and squad, if the battle is bigger add a Landraider and a squad. I don't think I am the only one in the group to hold this view. Rocco and various other people are compaining about the proiferation in AV 14 all round vehicles.
Conversly I can find very little to complain about the Tyrannid force you are fielding at the present moment. There are both large and small creatures in large enough numbers to justify taking an all round army containing equal amounts of Anti tank, anti infantry and close assault. While fielding an army like this against the Deathwing would be a bad idea.
At no point did I say that playing Deathwing was cheesy and powergaming but I dislike it in the fact that it forces me to concider adding more and more heavy firepower into my army (which could be seen as powergaming) in order to be able to deal effectivly with it.


Lion El Jason
19-05-2005, 01:48
But today Hei Man said his army could never deal with my 'nids as there were simply too many of them.
By your logic its a difficult army to play against as he would have to alter his list to deal with it.

40k isnt a game where every army does well against every other, its more of a Rock Paper scissors type affair. Daemonhunters don't do well against armoured company.
AC can struggle against necrons, Necrons have problems with Daemon hunters.
In the same way my Deathwing do well against marines, less well against IG. My 'nids were OK agains Daves Eldar but against Hei man the army made him want to quit after turn 2 (I hadn't done anything yet but he couldn't concieve of killing all the troops I had)

Personally I'd think assault marines can do well against a regular DW force of mine, all those Meltabombs options and large assault squads can easily cover all exits of a Land Raider and smoke wont protect in HtH...

19-05-2005, 09:45
Powergamer: A player who maxes out elements of his armies to be a strong as possible, with no regard to fluff; someone who plays to win at all costs; someone who is exceedingly boring to play due to their use of cheesey tactics.

19-05-2005, 10:35
Well in my mind i powergame . I put a lot of thought into making my list, and strive to make them the most efficient for the points value, i play to win and have not changed the list in several months . I've reached the stage where quite a few of the players at my club will not go against me as loosing is a forgone conclusion . On the other hand i don't whinge and moan about the game[at least while playing it], do my best to be a good sport, and have put the whole army together on a student budget .

I think a lot of folks are confusing powergaming ie playing to win, which in my mind is the only sensible way to approach playing any game , and being a terrible person to play. why can't you all accept that some of the folks who you play the game with are boring and antisocial, and they will be no fun to play against . Also if you play with deliberately inefficient lists, you will lose a lot[unless you're a tactical genius], live with it!

@Lion El-Jason and Kahadras, hymens really coming along as a general, he's beat me and joe now that hes got the hang of his new list. Will as a player is just beyond my words to describe .

Deathwing are beatable, consider it a test of whether you have enough plasma and anti-tank weapons . I do, after that its a contest of generalship,and in my case Jason's won it the majority of the time i've played against him .

Wolf Sgt Kirke
19-05-2005, 10:59
Power Gamers offer a fantastic service to all other gamers - they provide you with an oppurtunity to test out your army and refine it to be adaptable without the bad feeling of having lost when you should have won, although I would caution that lessons learnt against a "Beardy" player are magnified and so sweeping changes should not be made to any army, just learn what sneaky tricks you can apply to that Uber-death-kill unit he/she has wandering around, by the wayit is sometimes hard to tell the differences between a themed army, I.E. eldar swordwind and a power army - my space puppies are nearly all on bikes because i really like the Lone wolves comic, against some armies they are fearsome, against others, I get murdered!
All armies have a weakness

19-05-2005, 18:57
I think cheese and power gaming do exist, but the terms are thrown around too often at effective armies that win rather than cheesy players who ignore fluff and go all out for the win, like the all vyper army or the 1500point necron list with 2 monoliths and nightbringer.

My thoughts EXACTLY. I think it's just a way of saying "Your list is too good so I'm gonna say it's evil and your an evil power hungry freak!!!"

Why is it so bad to want to win and like winnning? Sure there is players who take winning too seriously. I myself get a little too excited about winning sometimes. So long as you actually enjoy the game regardless of the outcome (I do expect people to be a little bummed about losing. "Yay! I lost!!" is something I hope I never hear...because then people wouldn't be taking the game seriously at all!)

People should make a good list with their available models/resorces and people should think wisley about making the most of their point limit. Does it make sense to say "I don't want to be a power gamer so I won't give my gaunts the leaping ability for next to nothing points" NO! The point of the game is to have fun and to get good at it.

There are stratagies and counter stratagies up the ying yang so people should just take a second and look what's coming at them. I just think that people talking about how power gamers is bad is just whiny and silly, not only is it possible to beat them it just a freaking game! I'm sorry if I come off as a jerk, I know I probably do but I mean, come on.

Cheesy and power lists should just be thought of as people who pay too much money and can easilly be taken care of with the right counter list (example: armies with lots of vehicles are extremely weak against the Necrons who spend points on lots and lots of Warriors. Orks are weak to ranged armies, Imperial gaurd and Tau are very weak to close combat.) it's just a matter of having enough variety in your collection to see a need and fill a need.

19-05-2005, 22:07
My two cents:

The big problem is lack of communication. If you play someone and itīs clear from the outset itīs "game to win, to warp with the fluff and anything legal goes" thatīs fine. And if you donīt want to play such a game, you simply donīt. If you play someone and you both play themed armies knee deep in fluff, youīll probably be able to say, whoīs going to win before the game starts (Tau firewarrior army vs. Armoured company, or something I used to play in 2nd ed: Chaos Cult vs. Deathwing theme). But then you make up an interesting scenario and play out a story (if you ever had 400+ Cultists cut down by about 20 Deathwing Termies you know what Exterminatus means).

But if I play without knowing what kind of game itīs going to be, I face two other options:
a) Iīve got a competition army, my opponent doesnīt. That wonīt be a lot of fun for me, because Iīll be able to kill of his army in short order and I wonīt learn anything new. After all the point in taking an army that is competitive is to - no, not win, even if that might be the icing on the cake, but to compete. Itīs no fun if the other person isnīt even trying.
b) Iīve got a fluffy army and my opponent doesnīt. Not a lot of fun either, because Iīll get slaughtered, but it wonīt make a good story. And thatīs the point in a fluffy army - to play your battles as stories, that have a meaning. You name your troops, you count their scars. They are a part of the 40k universe, not some other place where the IA was revoked and 10 marine squads are the exception rather than the rule.

Now, most games fall between these categories, as do most armies. My perceptions of the average 40k-army is: Build to win without disregarding the fluff. Thereīs a somewhat even split between troops chosen for their stat-line and troops chosen for other reasons (neat fluff piece, thinking they are the characteristic choice for the army, cool model, etc.) and I think this is what ultimately constitutes a balanced army. Using such an army leads to the same problems as stated above, just less so (the themed army and the power-army being the extremes).

So after these points Iīd like to define a power gamer: A power gamer is a person who assumes that the average 40k game is one of the fist category I introduced and therefore believes, that thereīs no need to make it clear that such a game will take place. To me being a fair player means, that as a default I will assume the last option: Balanced armies. Iīll have stuff that can kill and stuff I just find imensely cool. And if I want to play an all-out competitive game, or an all-out fluffy game, I will talk to my opponent before the game starts.

19-05-2005, 22:38
Pretty damn spot on for a first post mate, summed it up nicely IMO. All I could add is what I've already posted.. most people play for fun and enjoy the game, win or lose. Power gamers don't... they enjoy only winning (in an odd and unsettling kind of way as well). Making a strong list does not make you a power gamer on its own... and many armies blur the line between strong maxed out lists and fluffy (alaitic, deathwing etc).

20-05-2005, 01:55
i dont really mind peoples lists as long as theyre pleasant. however becasue i like fl;uff so much i dont like lists that are pretty much "historically impossible".

so while i dont mid the gaming power of 5 man lasplas with razor backs ill still give you a low comp mark because marines sqauds should be around ten models, also becasue theyre tactical squads tjey should have some variety.

20-05-2005, 04:26
I've always felt that Power gaming and just really good gaming are almost the same...the only thing that divids them is attitude.

I've known some guys who armies are pretty much power gaming armies, but they're just so much fun to play against you don't really care...

20-05-2005, 07:43
Well in our part no one really is power gamer. The other problem is, that they have all started to tell me that I am a powergamer because I have won so many games. I play classic balanced IG and I think this is one of the armies that really can't be min/maxed. The players really use term powergamer for players better than themselves too often.

Brush your teeth
20-05-2005, 13:20
[QUOTE=rammo_73]You just embarassed me...I use that many Terminators...but only out of necesity.

sorry for embarassing you

Crazy Harborc
20-05-2005, 16:19
Had a few games, some years ago, with an opponent who was big on winning "no matter what". I went away from the table to get whatever. I got back sooner than he expected. He was measuring all over the place so he could "guess" distances on his turn.

Over time and after comparing notes with other players, we concluded that the guy was a powergamer, who cheated as well. Not the kind of person to trust or do business with in the "real world".

Most power gamers I have known seemed to be honest decent people. They just were hung up on "needing to win". I guess they need to "prove themselves". Some of them likely feel they are far short of equal to those around them in the everyday "real world".

Whatever, once in a while is okay...........BUT every game you/me/us/whoever play against them, if it's another "powergame", it gets to be a real pain/bore. That's why some of those powergamers moved on, nobody will play with/against them anymore.

20-05-2005, 16:32
Power gaming isn’t all bad. Sometimes you have to commit to an idea I am a power gamer and proud of it I play to win and love the game. Now any gamer that cheats is a totally different matter. If your that bad at the game you have to cheat then you should try to learn how to play. Something you will never achieve from cheating.

20-05-2005, 16:36
I'd suggest that power gamers also don't know how to lose. If you're beating someone and they start sulking, conceding on turn 2, wandering away from the game etc it's a fair bet they only play for the winning and not for the playing. I'm sure this isn't true of a lot of the people posting here who claim to be power gamers because they field strong lists... I'm sure we can all enjoy a game, win or lose.

20-05-2005, 23:36
Depends on the day, very much depends on the day. If every dice you've rolled for the entire game has been bad then I think its fair enough to get a little annoyed, happened to me on wednesday and I wasn't too cheerful about it, the thing that did me in was when the guy I was playing said "its not that bad..." I had to quit the game before I did something that I'd regrett later.

I find that most of the deviding lines people use for power games/normal players I'm often on the wrong side of. About the only good thing I can say is that about half of the people who beat me do so only after I've shown them how to. Don't really know why I tell them just doesn't seem fair not to somehow.

Power gamer or not I enjoy the game a lot but there are still moments...

Inq. Veltane
21-05-2005, 12:19
Almost always ugly...

21-05-2005, 16:05
Almost always ugly...

Yep, Warhammer was made for fun, not to always win at. :eyebrows: ;)

Thousandth Son
21-05-2005, 18:13
Well, doubtless we have heard what a power gamer is several times now, but as something that I personally think, it is someone who is in it to win at the cost of sportsmanship, fun, and common decency. Despite common views, you can have a "cheesy" army and not be a power gamer.

I had a game yesterday where I was playing a guy (who I don't like that much to begin with) who had a Falcon full of Striking Scorpians. His play was to run them up and use their Haywire Grenades to destroy the two predators that I have. Well he got within about 12" of my Predator with the HB's and AC, basically the scourge of any Eldar army, but what I do is I stun it with some Lascannon fire. So no moving or shooting (yay me). So in our store we have a pretty good understanding that we go by the "spirit" of the rules, rather than the actual letter of the law if there is a conflict. Not so with this guy. He uses a loophole to turn his stunned Falcon around on a dime, and then assaults my Tank and kills it. I consider that to be a bit power gamer-ish. But because it was in the rules I couldn't really argue with him. Oh well. :wtf:

21-05-2005, 18:37
my problem with power gamers is not facing them its more about their attitude when they start to lose thier trick doesnt work or you counter it they get very irate and verbal

case in point
(I just started 40 k but I have played fantasy for a while)

when playing a pitched battle in fantasy a guy had his Archon and his swords of chaos when I took out his ubber powerfull mighty man (with a bolt thrower I might add from my "wimpy" high elves :rolleyes: ) he got mad and collected his army off the table and stormed away telling me how :cheese: and stuff my elves are :wtf:

the funny thing is is he probibly would have won anyways with what was left on the feild but heaven forbid I take out archy

Ive noticed many 40k power gamers tend to be the same (not all) I play to have fun and really PG play to win no fun about it....Ill still play em

21-05-2005, 19:26
Power gaming IS bad because games are not about winning, they are about enjoying. Although winning and enjoying are not mutually exclusive, they are certainly not (and very much shouldn't be) necessary for one another. If players power game in a certain ruleset, I attribute it moreso to the ruleset than anything. Games like 40k are unfortunately built so a game can be decided before the models are set up (by army composition), which is the principle cause of power gaming.

21-05-2005, 22:09
I'd suggest that power gamers also don't know how to lose. If you're beating someone and they start sulking, conceding on turn 2, wandering away from the game etc it's a fair bet they only play for the winning and not for the playing.

This is one of the worst parts of Power Gamers. They come into a game all Full of bluster and will often demean the other player, taunting them with their 733t army making skills.

And when somones balanced and fluffy army totaly kicks the crap out the power gamers army, he'll begin to whine and sniffle, complain about the other players army being cheesey, and possibly their ancestors questionable parantage.

I have seen this a fair bit, not lately at the GW store, as the guys there are pretty quick to inform someone that they're being a Jerk.

I have seen a Power Gamer after a thumping complain to his posse about how the person who beat them was cheating, because the PGs army was Unbeatable.

22-05-2005, 15:43
One of my best gaming-buddies is a power gamers and we both enjoy playing against each other even though we have a very different view about the gaming experience and how we enjoy it.

He likes to read through all the codices and army builder files and come up with sick and twisted ideas, adjusting and maximizing his army's potential down to the last point. I like the artwork, painting single models and converting.

When he plays he concentrates like a chess-player would and will exploit his tactics (not rules) at the best of his ability to give him victory. When I play, I usually snatch defeat from the jaws of victory if I don't get crushed right away, which is often the case when we play 40k. The difference isn't that big in fantasy, but that has more to do with our armies (he fields an all-spearelf Dark Elf army from before the re-write of the army book). You see, a real power-gamer will actually field a "weak" army so that he can hone his mad skills as a master tactician. No steamtanks and ratling guns there!

We have so different views and ways to play the game that we essentially don't play the same game, but still we enjoy playing against each other because we have fun. Of course, there are very few people I have this much fun playing against, and that is why I keep coming back to get my ass kicked again and again. If he was another person, I'd quit playing him right away because, as I said, we don't play the same game.

Now, you can argue back and forth about what is the "right" way to play, but I don't think there is one right way to play. Just different ways. Live with it and don't play against people you don't like playing against. If you are like me and are in it mostly for the mood, fluff and pretty toy soldiers, don't play in tournaments where you will meet people who are in it for the number-crunching and meticulously (sp?) planned victories.

But having a pine tree forest stuck up your ass, rules-lawyering and trying to cheat there is no excuse against.

06-06-2005, 23:45
Hate the game not the player. This game can be played very differently. Some play it just because it is a good competitive game, and some play it because it has great models, good background (and possible because it is competitive). Some get their enjoyment from plain victory.

I think it is the game designers job to balance the game so that power gaming would also mean somewhat fluffy armies (meaning that every unit would be useful, and that players woudn't just stick to a few things). No total game winning units and such.

E: And it is our, the players and customers job to demand GW to do the job the way it should be done.

Wolf Scout Ewan
07-06-2005, 00:03
I dont like powergamers.

Never speaking, every kill is celebrated... all that kind of thing just rips the fun out of the game.

Games are meant to be fun and not about winning at any cost.

07-06-2005, 02:08
My definition of a power gamer is:
Someone who is unsatisfied with the game for it's honorable aspects (like sportsmanship, strategy, hobbying, the challenge.... ect.) but they tend to focus on one aspect....... winning. They tend to find a unit or combination that they like and focus all kinds of attention and points into it becuse it gets the job done.

I have no problems with these people personally. They work for what they care about and provide me an opponent at the same time. And game-wise if you know what aspect generally tends to be the best about their army then you know what to plan for when coming up with a list of your own.

It's a sort of symbiotic relationship..... they get a CHANCE to win and I get an opponent.

But more than that, it's always fun to send one home crying to their mommy :p

07-06-2005, 03:37
i believe that a power gamer is someone who plays just to win, possibly at the expense of having a good time cause the number one rule in warhammer is to have fun so if someones not then it isnt worth it

08-06-2005, 01:23
do what I do when playing a power gamer a well known power gamer.

I played a guy (2nd ed) who used a Harlequin Army against my guard (I had to roll a 6 to hit and then reroll and get a 4+ in order for one of my guardsmen to hit him). He got upset at me when I had 3 Leman Russes that were sitting beside the table that never went in, instead I drove in with 3 Hellhounds and torched all of his Harlequins on bikes. It was in my list, he just didn't ask me what was on it. He got really mad and then wanted a rematch with his blood angels- it consisted of 10 Tarantulas with Heavy Bolters and a devastator squad with all Lascannons. Needless to say, he crushed my guard army that time.

He was the only power gamer I didn't like to play against. He was the beardiest of beardy, later he became an outrider and stopped his power gaming ways, but it took a while...

08-06-2005, 07:23
I think there are different types of 'Power Gamers' - firstly the usual sort, the people who take 5-man Marine armies with lascannon and plasma guns in each squad, with as many of these squads as possible. This requires very little thought, as with the Iron Warrior 9 Obliterator army, so is easy to achieve and think up. These are the type of people who give 'Power gamers' a bad name.

The other sort is those who know they play to win, but try to make an army which is although powerful, also goes to a theme. For example, with myself, I will openly admit that I will create the beardiest and cheesiest armies possible, and yet I still always theme them around something. I only ever use my armies in tournaments, and I am currently working on a Speed Freak Grot army, all mounted in Buggies, or various scrap-metal vehicles. That's right, rather than the traditional, "Shove loads of orks in fast vehicles" method, I themed my army around Grots instead, with a load of humorous conversions on my buggies, e.g. Grots getting chucked off by another grot, etc. etc.

I also tend to play my games in a friendly manner, laughing at myself when something gets blown back in my face, and always point out the rules they might be forgetting (I mean the rules which will help them rather than me). This allows the people I play against to have a good laugh, even if they do get totally annihalated, hence why I will frequently pick up sportsmanship marks due to having a good game.

However at one point I came against your usual power gamer sort, a Space Marine player with an army packed full of Assault Cannons (3 Dreads, 3 Speeders) and 5-man marine squads with las/plas combos. This guy was also a Rules Lawyer, always argueing with what I was doing to try and get it to his best advantage. After 1 turn of him being the most annoying person I have ever met, I decided to turn into a rules lawyer myself and made his life complete and utter hell. Bwa-ha-ha!

New Cult King
08-06-2005, 08:19
I get sick of "your army list is really cheap and could kick my butt because I din't make all that good of a list. I hate you and I will talk bad about you and start a club called 'I hate people who know what they are doing when they make an army list to win club' and I fart in your general direction!"

I would be very surprised if you actually came across someone with this exact attitude. Somehow I think you are exaggerating the point.

There is a difference between someone who makes a powerful army list, and a power-gamer. Being a power gamer has nothing to do with making an effective army list, and everything to do with consistently making army lists designed to win at all costs, regardless of the experience of the game.

Everyone would like to win, yes, but speaking personally, if I lose, then I would like to lose to a well-balanced army that defeated me with superior tactics and timing, rather than an unbalanced list designed at the outer limits of the rules.

When you play a game of Warhammer 40K, I believe you have a responsibility to yourself and your opponent to make the game as enjoyable as possible. Making an uber-killer army list is not in the spirit of the hobby, in my opinion.

Of course, I have never been to a tournament, and don't really like the mindset that goes with those kind of games. I like fun games between good players where a story is created throughout the battle.

08-06-2005, 10:28
Powergamer - someone who does not care about the story behind his army and the game, treating the game as an abstract engagement of minds and nothing more.

Please note - I do not care if the list is rock-hard, only if it represents the army, that some race could actually field. I have absolutely nothing against lists with three wraithlords and only aspect warriors - I consider them to be more fluffy, than hordes of Guardians.

I have absolutely nothing against powergamers. The only problem is when powergamer plays against a backgrounder (erm... certainly not the "fluffer" ;] ). These two kinds do not mix well.

08-06-2005, 12:06
Of course, I have never been to a tournament, and don't really like the mindset that goes with those kind of games. I like fun games between good players where a story is created throughout the battle.

You obviously haven't attended any tournaments. You would be hard pressed to find a game that isn't fun, with good players and no story. Many tourney players go to great lengths to create and write fluff for their armies.


Get along to one of these near you. They are the most fun you can have with your pants on.

Crazy Harborc
09-06-2005, 03:09
Several years ago, an opponent who won oh, 19 out of 20 games........lost to me. His mouth dropped open (for real :) ) He was mad. I didn't hear from him for about three months.

Years of experience cured me of power gaming. I did NOT like how I felt about gaming, opponents, sportsmanship. When all that matters is winning, IMHO, it's no longer a game played for fun.

12-08-2005, 05:09
there is no such thing as a power gamers, just power losers that whine about who they are.(sup C-ody) :cries:

12-08-2005, 11:32
" They are the most fun you can have with your pants on."

You Sir, are obviously NOT creative enough ;)

12-08-2005, 12:36
It is my firm belif that at 2000 pts there is no cheeze in 40k.. since then you have enough points to deal with most things..

Power gamers are those that argue every rule, every measurement, everything.. and it does indeed suck to play against them.

12-08-2005, 13:22
Powergamers....humm......bad and ugly I'd say.

Okay, the overall balance of the game is very endangered in games with less than 1000points, but I just don't like seeing armies consisting of 2x5 SM scouts for their only troop choices or 2x5 CSM, a DP, a tooled Lt., a Defiler, a Pred, a bunch of chosen and 2 Obliterators. It's just cheap and spits into the face of the fluff fairy.

Oh, and there are natural min-maxers. They ignore fluff and have no sense for balanced army lists AT ALL. Even worse: They just don't get it if you try to explain the concept of balanced army lists to them. They're like children who've never been tought the difference between good and evil!

12-08-2005, 13:30
I think power gamers are those that only play for winning! With total disregard for fluff and playing for fun! They are bad and ugly!

12-08-2005, 13:31
I don't believe in the concept of good or bad..... so I'll have to go with ugly on this one! :D the only real problem I have, is that the lists are unimaginative, so the games you play agains't them are boring.

Also how they look so serious when they are playing, like in those lame anime cartoons like beyblade or something, they play as if their life depends on it and get really emo if they lose, and brag for a good few hours if they win.

Lord Malachi
12-08-2005, 14:30
Power gamers are a bit boring to play against given that their army list and tactics are usually very predictable. I'd go with ugly. I know one guy who always power games and takes like 2 hours to fine tune his list and then wants to go with another list/army altogether when he discovers that you've taken an army that negates his armies strong point(s). Not as bad as the local 'Nid player who cries cheese if you take 9 Tornados against his enless gaunts and 4 jacked up Hive Tyrant and Carnifexes... :cheese:

12-08-2005, 16:40
I think that power gamers don't really exist, they are just figments of are duranged imagination. If anyone is to blame it is games workshop, for the lack of tight rules without loop holes. But even they are not to blame, for they only made an awesome game. But I think what most people call power gamers are really just master staregists.

12-08-2005, 17:08
The most extreme power-gamers are those that sit for hours with spreadsheets and calculators to find what units and combinations give out the most punishment for the least cost.

Thats not strategy or tactics, its just number-crunching, and it does not matter what game system they are using, be it 40k or anything else.

These people arent really playing the game they are playing the rules system.

Thats not to say games against them cannot be fun, its just more of a battle of academic ability rather than strategy or tactics.

Then you have people who are poor sports. They are always annoying to play and are best avoided.

Then you have people who interpret the background in a particular way and just cannot grasp the idea that other people's opinions differ from their own.
They can also be frustrating opponents.

Personally, I like to see find out how my tactics and strategy work.
I like to find out if I can outthink and outmanouvre my opponent, rather than simply make a better armylist.
I have beaten Khorne bezerker armies with Sisters of Battle by charging the bezerkers which seems stupid, but means that the points my opponent spent on frag grenades, furious charge and stuff like that does not benefit them.
Most people would have simply stuck to gunline tactics. Thus I outthought my opponent by doing something unexpected.

If you are a master of strategy and tactics then that does not mean simply making the most powerful list, but instead means you can take any unit and beat the enemy with it, even units that people think are ineffective.

12-08-2005, 22:03
One thing I do notice (it's been mentioned before) is a tendency amongst players to make sweeping generalizations based on a handful of games, and as a corrolary, to talk as though certain armies will always produce a certain result against others.

Good example: I played two games against a given marine player, in which he mounted just about everything in transports and used a lot of tanks. He won both games, in large part because my rolls for armor penetration were uniformly horrible. I don't think my tyrant got even a single glancing hit in either game, and my 'fex apparently needed glasses, 'cuz he couldn't hit the broad side of a land raider.

After the second game, I start hearing him talk about how "mechanized lists kick 'nids in the teeth," and how that's the army he'll be using against me from now on. I'd argue that drawing that sort of sweeping conclusion from a couple of games is a tad hasty.

I was also slightly amazed when I started playing at my local store over the summer and proceeded to win the majority of the games I played there. The reaction was invariably comments about how the new 'nid codex must be overpowered. I think the the insistance that it was the army book, and not how I play it (I've been playing Tyranids for a long time now, and I'd like to think I'm at least decent by now) was interesting.

All that said, my priority is having fun. I freely admit that I'm not the best sport in the world, though I'm told I'm not too bad. I build lists that I like; effectiveness is a consideration, but so is look, theme (does "dear emperor that's a lot of gaunts" count as a theme?), and fun. I take a Lictor because I think they're cool, I take talons on my shooting carnifex because I think it looks stupid without them, I take hordes of gaunts because I love the way a swarm looks when fully deployed. The result works pretty well, though it's far from foolproof, and a tricked-out, tournament-worthy list will tear it to shreds.

And (finally, something directly on-topic), the thing I dislike about powergamers is not that their lists are effective, it's that they'll turn around after winning and insist that my list is deserving of a ruthless crushing because it's weak. It's the attitude that me choosing my list based on anything other than brutal effectiveness makes me inferior in some way. It is, in short, a sophisticated way for them to tell me that I don't play the game the right way, and that they do.

Anyone who reads this all the way to the end is awarded a mind-cookie.

Crazy Harborc
13-08-2005, 02:09
Playing with pants on!!?? I think I'll skip no pants on wargaming. There can be splinters around some of those table edges :eek:

Life is too short (and I'm too old) to waste "enjoyment time" in a game with a "gotta win no matter what"!! opponent.

One advantage to hosting most of the games, is being able to have a say about who gets in the door. :D

13-08-2005, 02:58
It's pretty simple in my mind, a good player is one that remembers that both players are there to have a good time. Once you start worrying only about your fun, you start down a dark path..

13-08-2005, 06:05
I am a total Powergamer when it comes to MMOs (or used to be). Nothing wrong with wanting to be the best, and doing it. Walking the walk and talking the talk is important. Just remember the more toes you step on along the way, the worse it will be when you fall from grace ^^, and believe me <b>Everyone</b> does.

I have no problems with people who study up and make armies that are made to win, but if you can't show some gamesmanship then you might get a swift kick to the head in the parking lot.

13-08-2005, 06:07
I don't believe in the concept of good or bad..... so I'll have to go with ugly on this one!

I murder jerry's kids for fun because it feels good.
/sarcasm off.

The Winter King
13-08-2005, 09:52
I vote good. If someone puts a lot of thought into his army list, and then uses it to try to win the game he's playing, I don't really see why that's a problem.

IThey break everything down into quantified chunks to gain maximum power with minimum trade-offs...

The true goal of a powergamer seems to be, to create such a devastating army that they need not think about the game to win it - the game plays itself to the ultimate demise of the opponent...

- There is no reality. So Troops are the most common soldier available to the army? Stuff that! They take as little Troops as they can, so they can fill out the reast of the points with the real hard hitters. I'm sure that every gov in the world would like to have a whole army of SAS/Black Ops/whatever but it just doesn't happen - the best training and equipment simply cannot be given to everyone in sight. Reality is a thing that will exist even in the distant future.

The question of reality always arises, unless of course reality is used to support a power-gaming point of view and then suddenly it's just a game. So, in reality, the Prussian Army used to measure the fire power of its volleys so that they could achieve maximum effect on the battlefield. I bet the other European powers complained that the Fredericks were powergaming. And the modern day American armed forces, if someone pointed out how unfair it is for them to use their well-researched technological advantage, I bet they would apologize and start handing out the rusty AK-47s and RPGs.

Special Forces: going into Afghanistan, I read that 40,000 troops in the US armed forces were considered "special". That's not counting armour, artillery and air power. Now there are a lot of soldiers not accounted for in that 40,000 but there are a lot of butchers, bakers and candlestick makers in that army.

And the concept that a well tweaked list requires no thought to play is raised more than once in this thread, if so, what happens when two power-gamers collide. Presumably someone will have to do some thinking. Building lists is part of playing the game, hence the forum devoted to Army lists.

If you want to role-play then go role-play, I do when I get that urge to do something cooperative that involves no real winners or losers. Or play campaigns, with guidelines for army building, sounds like fun to me.

To address the other seeming definition of a power-gamer, someone who is not fun and/or a cheater. This is a different issue. To address this we would have to have a thread entitled "Peckerheads: Good, Bad or Ugly", but it wouldn't get as much discussion. It has less to do with the list than it does personality.

13-08-2005, 15:08
they seem to forget that you cannot apply stats to 40k, dice just don't obey them :D I don't know what all this rubbish is about powergamers making the "most powerful" list, since most of their lists have easily exploitable weakness' and often lack staying power.

14-08-2005, 08:05
I have got no real problem with playing a powergamer. If they want to spend the time to number crunch and tweak their army list for maximum effiectivness...that's cool. If they want to min-max...that's slightly less cool (but cool nonetheless). If they enjoy trying to tweak the maximum effect from their army who am I to tell them they shouldn't? I would like to be warned if they are playing a min-maxed army so I can do the same...but after hanging around in the store for a while you get to know people's styles of play.

What I do not like to play against is someone with no sportsmanship or, for lack of a better word, niceness. Someone earlier said that they played in a tournament where their opponent forced them to take a dangerous terrain test for their land raider because the front ramp, when opened, touched terrain or when the sponson lascannnon brushed up against a tree. I don't know about other people, but I would be righteously pissed if they tried to pull that on me. If that's the way they want to win, fine, they win. They would never find an opponent in me again. Another thing that bugs me is if I forget to move or shoot something, they won't let me do it. I can see why they won't (it is my responsibility to remember), and they have every right to refuse. But it bugs me because I would let them go back and do it. The one exception is that I might not let them do it if they are being a prick.

I hope that...made sense...and...was...readable.
Need bed...sleep...
Sleepy...slrrpt....tg6yyg6666666666666666666666666 666666666666666666666666666
*head hits keyboard*

14-08-2005, 10:36
if they did try that on me id just close the ramp and swivel the lascannon and give them a big smile. its not like chess where once youve placed something your forbidden to change your mind.

The Green Git
14-08-2005, 15:10
Coming in late in the game here...

It says something that this thread has lasted as long as it has. Reading the posts it seems there are actually two styles of play that people consider "Power Gamers".

One is the Numbers Cruncher. This is the type of player that owns Army Builder or some other computerized list generation software and typically has a very wide selection of troop types for their chosen army or armies. They will spend a lot of time tweaking lists and seeing what can be done with a given points cost, often looking for unusual or little taken combinations. When selecting types of units, you tend to see extremes like thirty-six Star Cannons, nine Obliterators, or 30 Terminators. The thought is that there is some hidden combination that, if stumbled upon, will allow easy wins with the army. This type of player is the most likely to "min-max" a list because to take those 36 Star Cannons, 9 Oblits or 30 Termies one needs points usually spent on Troop selections.

The other is the Winner. Some here have coined WAAC (Win At All Costs) and this is a good moniker. These players are the most likely to have studied the rules frontwards, backwards and sideways. They know the exact wording of rules especially the ones that can be ambiguous or interpreted more than one way, and tend towards the literal wording even if it runs counter to logic or fair play. If any rule can be interpreted more than one way the one that helps them most at the given point in the game will be asserted. If their opponent does not assert a game rule or forgets a unit strength, power or asset (and it works in the Winner's favor) they will allow that slip because it's not their job to remind their opponent what his stuff can or can't do... they are there to win. This player will hold you to turn sequences and actions strictly.

I think the Numbers Cruncher is often found at the FLGS. Now you can have a nice player that is a numbers cruncher. I know several. It is something that most players succumb to in some form. A thinking person will tend to want to try as many combinations as possible. While one might find some "magic" combination occasionally they usually have a glass jaw and can be easily defeated by the right counter army. Termies vs Star Cannons, for example. Personally I find this somewhat boring as eventually it becomes extravagant Rock-Paper-Scissors type affairs.

The WAAC player is found a lot at tournaments. I have actually been privy to some conversations at RTTs where players automatically assume they will get zeroed out on Sportsmanship and Army Comp but figure if they win enough games big enough then it doesn't matter. This to me shouts WAAC and seems to run contrary to the GW party line of "Will not act in a manner that brings the Hobby into disrepute." At the very least it displays contempt for the other players and disregard for their enjoyment. After all, the idea is to win right? In a way this is a numbers crunching on the tournament scoring system...

Which leads me to the Ultimate Evil™: The Numbers Crunching WAAC player. Here's the guy that brings the 30 Lascannon toting army to the local RTT. His Army Selection scores will Zero when plops the army down because it's Min-Maxed and he knows it. But this is not a factor, as he is Going To Win. His opponents may or may not have fun, but that doesn't matter: he is Going To Win. Unusual situations may crop up that require some Grey matter to be applied to the rules, but whether he is hanging on by his fingernails or (more likely) mopping up the board with the opponent he will argue his side of the rule because he is Going To Win. He has to because he knows he will get Zeroed on Sportsmanship and Comp, so he must Win Big. Every Battle Point will be hotly contested. This player will have an above average to stunning looking army. He may or may not have painted it himself, but that doesn't matter to the UE player as he is not their to compete in Cool Conversion or Best Painted or anything else... he's Going To Win.

Numbers Crunchers can be nice. WAAC players generally suck. WAAC Number Crunchers will ruin your day.

The moral of this story: Power Gamers like everything else in life comes in shades of Gray. Stay towards the light. Go into the light. Turn away from the Dark Side. Don't look too long into the Darkness, or you will become it.

14-08-2005, 20:12
This sort of argument comes up in roleplaying circles all the time; roleplayers versus rollplayers. People who are in it for the story vesus people who are in it to create powerful characters.

The powergamer argument boils down to both powergamers and background nuts each insisting that the other side plays the game wrong.

Mad Doc Grotsnik
14-08-2005, 20:26
Power Gamers are ugly, ugly ugly.

Every single rule, every single roll, every single move they will challenge, in a pathetic attempt to gain the upperhand. Their armies are usually unimaginative, and involve dodgy rules interpretations (generally, 'It doesn't say I can't!') and so on.

They do not understand that its a game. To them, it's an ego trip. 'Nuff said.

14-08-2005, 22:27
The thing that annoys me is when the WAAC crowd brings their armies into GW stores. Nothing is worse than going down to have a quiet game and seeing nothing but min/maxed piles of cheese laid out on every table. The need to win a compertition is understandable (within reason of course) but the insane desire to win every friendly (I use this term loosly with WAAC players) game is offputting at the best of times.


15-08-2005, 01:57
I want the Hackmaster +12 !!!!!!!!