New/Returning players: Important Video on Close Combat

[Lyraeus]

For all new/Returning players, close combat is a huge part of 8th edition. As an Ork player I want people to be aware of the things I will be doing. 

This is gotcha 40k, and I want no games where that happens if I can help it. 

 

Having said that, Mini Wargaming did 8th edition rules and advanced rules. Here is there video on Advanced Close Combat rules and examples of them on the game table

[pretre]

15 minutes ago, Lyraeus said:

For all new/Returning players, close combat is a huge part of 8th edition. As an Ork player I want people to be aware of the things I will be doing. 

This is gotcha 40k, and I want no games where that happens if I can help it. 

 

Having said that, Mini Wargaming did 8th edition rules and advanced rules. Here is there video on Advanced Close Combat rules and examples of them on the game table

Non video version?

[Lyraeus]

7 minutes ago, pretre said:

Non video version?

I don't really have a good one and a lot of it is visual. Maybe I can find a good blog post

[pretre]

Just now, Lyraeus said:

I don't really have a good one and a lot of it is visual. Maybe I can find a good blog post

I'm pretty sure I know what it'll be talking about, but not curious enough to watch a video. 😉

[fluger]

I look forward to watching this while I poop.

[Guest]

This video is about how to be a more unpleasant player. Yes, it's technically correct, but it's playing in a way that won't make friends and will likely make people upset with the 40k rules for being poorly written.

Reminds of a tactic that @peter.cosgrove was doing, where he'd use the CSM backpacks to "hook" models in place, as you can't fallback through enemy models (so if you are "hooked" in place, you can't fallback no matter how much space you have to fallback). He's right, that is the rules, but it's the kinda thing that should be reserved for a time of desperation, not something you do in every fight phase.

[Dusldorf]

24 minutes ago, paxmiles said:

This video is about how to be a more unpleasant player. Yes, it's technically correct, but it's playing in a way that won't make friends and will likely make people upset with the 40k rules for being poorly written.

Reminds of a tactic that @peter.cosgrove was doing, where he'd use the CSM backpacks to "hook" models in place, as you can't fallback through enemy models (so if you are "hooked" in place, you can't fallback no matter how much space you have to fallback). He's right, that is the rules, but it's the kinda thing that should be reserved for a time of desperation, not something you do in every fight phase.

lol shaming people for following the rules, classy

FWIW, i agree w/ you about peter's thing though. but the vid isn't anything like that imo.

[Guest]

Just now, Dusldorf said:

lol shaming people for following the rules, classy

If you only care about the rules, what does it matter if others perceive your behavior as unpleasant?

Shame is only there if you'd feel bad about being unpleasant to people.

 

That said, if you really don't care about the other people, why play with other people in the first place? Why be social?

[Dusldorf]

turn it around: if you don't care about the rules why not play open play? why play the game at all? there's nothing unpleasant about following rules. you are in control of whether you want to play the game, rules and all.

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Dusldorf said:

turn it around: if you don't care about the rules why not play open play? why play the game at all? there's nothing unpleasant about following rules. you are in control of whether you want to play the game, rules and all.

You are reading into this one a different direction than I am.

My point was "play nice" and you accused me of shaming people for asking them to play nice because being nice isn't part of the rules.

[Dusldorf]

you were the one who started off by saying the vid is about "how to be an unpleasant player," which it's not...

[Lyraeus]

@paxmiles shaming who? If we are going to play a game I want people on the same footing as I am. I don't want people thinking we are playing checkers when it's obviously chess.

It's not even unpleasant rules because you and I get into semantic rules arguments a lot it seems. That's fine. If you want to play a tight game then you need to know the rules well to know what you need to do to succeed. 

I play orks. I WILL be getting into close combat. If you as a player uses a few advanced techniques such as move blocking and screening you can give me more of a challenge. It's not about playing nice, it's about becoming better players and understanding that this is how the game is played at a minimum. 

 

I could play cut throat and just bring 25 lootas and 60 grots and watch people gnash their teeth as they are shot off the board by one of the most dangerous units in the game. That's not fun for people if they don't know how to counter that. So instead I will be Assaulting more and want people to be able to counter me. 

[Guest]

Just now, Dusldorf said:

you were the one who started off by saying the vid is about "how to be an unpleasant player," which it's not...

I see, so you disagree on my interpretation of the video. Why not just say that? Why start with accusation of "shamming" people?

[Dusldorf]

1 minute ago, paxmiles said:

I see, so you disagree on my interpretation of the video. Why not just say that? Why start with accusation of "shamming" people?

because you suggested that people who play the way the video shows are unpleasant. not sure how that's something other than shaming...

[Lyraeus]

@paxmiles I don't know what CSM backpacks do that as you have to stay more than an inch away from models and most that have backpacks have bases so their figure doesn't matter.

As I said, this is for people so that we are all playing from the same deck of cards. If you don't know these basic advanced rules then it's like you are taking the aces and kings out of your deck

[Ish]

As I've said elsewhere on this forum when the subject has come up, I think it's the intent that matters far more than the action. 

That Guy will use advanced rules and sly tricks to score a win against his opponent no matter what. That Guy wants to win.
This Guy will use advanced rules and sly tricks to score a win against his opponent when its fair. This Guy wants to win clean.

 

[Guest]

29 minutes ago, Lyraeus said:

@paxmiles shaming who? If we are going to play a game I want people on the same footing as I am. I don't want people thinking we are playing checkers when it's obviously chess.

It's not even unpleasant rules because you and I get into semantic rules arguments a lot it seems. That's fine. If you want to play a tight game then you need to know the rules well to know what you need to do to succeed. 

I play orks. I WILL be getting into close combat. If you as a player uses a few advanced techniques such as move blocking and screening you can give me more of a challenge. It's not about playing nice, it's about becoming better players and understanding that this is how the game is played at a minimum.

I don't know. I was only using his use of "shame" because he said it. I don't really think telling people to play nice is shaming them. Anyway, I guess I didn't explain my point well, given that multiple people are getting to a different conclusions about what I meant. Sorry.

 

You keep talking about 40k as a tight ruleset. It isn't. It never has been. GW has a long history of vague rules with even more vague support. It's getting better, but it's not to the stage of a tight ruleset. That video is one player's interpretation of the rules. He is probably right, but expecting players to adhere to one player's interpretation is unreasonable and will result in unpleasantness in-game. I'm trying to share wisdom. You don't have to believe me, but I've gotten in a lot of such debates where I was very much following the RAW to the letter and players just don't always want to use it. And they don't have to.

40k, in practice, uses a democratic ruleset due to a lack of support from GW in actually defining their rules in a clear manner. Sure, the book says one thing, and players kinda follow the book. But then someone asks in the store what it means, and the local consensus of players defines the rule you actually play with based on what they conclude it "means," which is often not the RAW.

New players often report that the rules seem to change from game to game, and they often do. It's not always intentional, each player interprets things a bit differently. And in fairness, there is a lot to keep track of, especially for new players.

So my point is to play nice. Don't assume that that everyone interprets the rules same way, or that there is a "one correct way" to interpret the rules.

[Lyraeus]

Just now, Ish said:

As I've said elsewhere on this forum when the subject has come up, I think it's the intent that matters far more than the action. 

That Guy will use advanced rules and sly tricks to score a win against his opponent no matter what. That Guy wants to win.
This Guy will use advanced rules and sly tricks to score a win against his opponent when its fair. This Guy wants to win clean.

 

I would rather be the second than the first. Hence the point of this topic

[Guest]

30 minutes ago, Lyraeus said:

It's not even unpleasant rules because you and I get into semantic rules arguments a lot it seems.

For the record, I am working on that. I get in stupid semantic debates with all sorts of people, and usually for bad reasons and on topics that really shouldn't matter to me. Working on picking my battles better, but still terrible at it, as you have noted.

Giving me a heads up when I do it, might diffuse me. Sorry I do it.

[Lyraeus]

 

4 minutes ago, paxmiles said:

For the record, I am working on that. I get in stupid semantic debates with all sorts of people, and usually for bad reasons and on topics that really shouldn't matter to me. Working on picking my battles better, but still terrible at it, as you have noted.

Giving me a heads up when I do it, might diffuse me. Sorry I do it.

Look, this video is not an interpretation of the rules and that is something that needs to be clear. These rules were helped created and checked by tournament players and people who ran tournaments. Not everything is perfect and unambiguous as things happen but as far as this video is concerned, nothing has changed these rules and they are VERY IMPORTANT to learn if you want to be a better player. 

Not only do you need to know how charging works and what can block you but what you can do to block others. 

Your game with @apathy ales is case and point as this could of shown you how to block his smash captain from getting to your HQ's

[Lyraeus]

Please remember everyone. We play Match Play not because it's a match but because it's an even playing field rule set. We all play by the same rules and thus have the same advantages and disadvantages 

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Lyraeus said:

 

Look, this video is not an interpretation of the rules and that is something that needs to be clear. These rules were helped created and checked by tournament players and people who ran tournaments. Not everything is perfect and unambiguous as things happen but as far as this video is concerned, nothing has changed these rules and they are VERY IMPORTANT to learn if you want to be a better player.

Sorry, I'm done here. Anyone who starts talking about things as absolute truths.....

[Ish]

If we are going to have semantic rules debates (and given the typical nerd mindset and the level of GWs editing - we totally are) then its better we do it here in the forum instead of at the gaming table. The forum gives us the chance to work things out collectively, time to read the rules and errata at our leisure, and maybe look for other sources on internet (blogs, vlogs, etc.) that have addressed the issue. 

[Lyraeus]

3 minutes ago, paxmiles said:

Sorry, I'm done here. Anyone who starts talking about things as absolute truths.....

Prove me wrong then. Please, go through your rules and tell me one thing from this video that is wrong that hasn't been faqed. 

 

If you are going to claim people are mean players for playing the rules as they are in the book, Prove. Them. Wrong. 

Otherwise when I use these rules against you like your blood angle opponent did,  it won't be fun or fair to you. 

[Ish]

I think that Paxsmiles and Lyraeus are both right. I just think they're having two separate conversations... 😅

Lyraeus want's to share some information so that everyone can step up their game, getting everyone to play a bit better. If I may presume to speak for Pax, I don't think he objects to anyone getting more skilled at playing the game.

Pax wants everyone to remember not to abuse that information and take advantage of less skilled players. If I may presume to speak for Lyraeus, I don't think he objects to anyone playing the game in a sportsmanlike manner.