Jump to content

indytims

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    888

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

 Content Type 

Posts posted by indytims

  1. Painted Models Only / WYSIWYG Only

    in Warhammer 40,000

    Posted

    To the question though, honestly even though we (eg Storm and Harvester) require painting and have rules against proxies and such we have been fairly lax of late and have allowed several players to get by without really meeting the requirements or truly getting our approval for a questionable counts as.  We made the calls to allow them, for various reasons, right or wrong, but going forward I don't know.  We much prefer to require painting but with people continuing to skirt the rules it may not make a lot of sense.  I am frankly tired of being forced to play a game of chicken every event and wish people would just have some integrity -- but then again if we don't enforce the rules then who lacks the integrity?

     

    Sucks, wish people would just paint their stuff.

     

    It's one reason I haven't ran a tournament in a long, long time - I can be a hard ass. If someone shows up - especially someone I 100% know KNEW about the painting requirement, and they showed up with unpainted stuff anyway - I'd turn them away. I don't care if they drove hours. They knew ahead of time, and they -chose- to disregard my tournament rules? Ain't happenin'. I don't think denying them entry to the game is anymore disrespectful than them showing up disregarding the rules. Some will argue 'it's just an aesthetic', and that's cool - but if it's part of the event rules, then it should be followed like any other rule, aesthetic or not.

     

    In casual play - I don't care. I only play with painted stuff myself (for the most part), and I am fine if my opponent goes silver-surfer/gray-legion or whatever. But if an advertised event requires it - people should follow the rules or wait to participate at a time they can meet the requirements.I don't think that's asking too much.

    • Like 4

  2. Rudra's Super Special Infinity Blog

    in Infinity

    Posted

    And this is what makes me apprehensive about Infinity! That a game can be over by turn one. We've all seen the Warhammer game or 40k game where the game was over before it started but in actuality the game itself went 3-4 turns. How often does this happen that a game of infinity ends this quickly?

     

    The big difference is, in 40K, when it's your opponent's turn to do things, you generally don't get to do squat except watch, make armor saves and pull handfuls of figures off the table.

     

    In Infinity, there is a lot you can do during your opponent's turn. Not as much as when it's your active turn, of course, but still quite a bit. I thought the same thing when I started. "This scenario ends after turn 3? Why so fast?" And then you find out why after playing a few games. :)

     

    In a game like 40K, you get to 'activate' a figure 4-7 times a game, during each of your turns. Each figure gets to activate once each turn. In Infinity, you have the potential of activating a single figure 0-7 (or more) times *each turn*... but at the expense of not activating other figures *at all*. But it's entirely *your decision* who you activate, and how much/often (within the limits of your order pool). Another thing I feared when I started was the 'Activate one bad-ass a bunch of times each turn', and while that is potentially possible, it also might not be very efficient, especially in scenarios involving objectives.

     

    As others have mentioned, the best thing to do is to play a few demo games and find out for yourself. See if your apprehension goes away or if it only gets worse. Infinity isn't for everyone... just as 40K or Warmachine isn't, either. Reading about it is one thing - going through the motions a few times (BEFORE sinking $ into it) is highly recommended. :)

     

    -Tim

    • Like 2

  4. Painted Models Only / WYSIWYG Only

    in Warhammer 40,000

    Posted

    I've enjoyed a few tournaments in the past where painted figs were required, with a hard-restriction for it. Those events tended to be smaller than the norm, but there was definitely something appealing to being in a tournament where -every- figure you faced was actually painted.

     

    To me, it's a part of the hobby. If a tournament doesn't require it, I'd love for there to be some other benefit from having a painted force. Re-rolls or some other sort of in-game bonus. But that's just me.

     

    I've known -lots- of people who are vehemently against any sort of 'painted figure benefit'. To a lot of people, the game is more important than pretty colors.

     

    -Tim

    • Like 2

  12. And the battle begins...

    in Infinity

    Posted

    We have a similar experience on the other side of the river.

     

    Dice Age doesn't stock Infinity, and the reason they give is because the line is simply too big. I've ordered a few figs from them with VERY random results, so I don't bother. Hence, I don't go there much anymore.

     

    I also ordered some figs from the store near my house (Super Salty - now Fate and Fury), and half the order was 'out of stock', while the other half arrived within 4-5 days.

     

    Tiger, I feel your pain, and while I try to back my LGS whenever I can (except when it comes to GW product), what you've experienced there would put me off going back, for good. Time is our most precious commodity, and they've wasted a crapload of yours, whether by their own doing or not.

     

    Just my grumpy-old-man opinion, though.

    • Like 4

  14. Thoughts on Allies

    in Kings of War

    Posted

    Never been a fan of 'allies' in most game systems, because it 1) Provides a crutch to cover an army's weakness, and 2) Is a mechanism for the game company to sell more models.

     

    If your chosen force wasn't -supposed- to have a weakness, it wouldn't have been designed that way.

     

    At least with KOW's, there are built in limitations which make it not so bad. But if I ran any sort of event - I wouldn't allow 'em. That's just the 'purist' in me, I guess. :)

     

    -Tim

    • Like 1

  18. Slayer-Fan123 on Dakkadakka.com

    in Warhammer 40,000

    Posted

    While this may be true, the reverse case also holds water- the "I have won X games with this army/tactic/list" poster is often insinuating that the fact that they have won (or won a certain number of games, or have a certain win record) somehow proves, in absentia of any other information, that their creation is awesome and they are a fantastic player. If you remember Black BlowFly that posted to BoLS pretty regularly back in the day, he often made such claims- but when he posted battle reports, his opponents were incompetent to the point of being self-defeating, such as the GK player who disembarked all of his troops into an empty battlefield just in time for BBF's whole army to Deep Strike around them.

     

     

     

    Good point - but it seems people tend to jump to this explanation first, rather than consider that the guy could just be a good (or really good) player. At least in my interwebz experience, that's what I've seen.

     

    The tone of the conversation is important, and each person can take it differently. I didn't get the impression that the op was insinuating that their creation was awesome and/or that they were a great player (I didn't see his record mentioned until this thread after he was defending himself, unless I just missed it). What I got was, 'Hey, you -can- win games using the codex as-is', which is obviously true. He used his anecdotal evidence to support it, which of course some people won't ever accept until he plays in a 'bigger pond'.

     

    I could very well have misinterpreted the op's message, though. I'm telling you - don't get old. ;)

     

    And Fluger makes a good point too, what works for one person just might not work or gel for another.

     

    -Tim

  20. Slayer-Fan123 on Dakkadakka.com

    in Warhammer 40,000

    Posted

    The argument where total strangers bang on your meta is a straw man. They have no clue if your meta is strong, weak, or somewhere in between and can only make wild assumptions based on their own anecdotal evidence.

     

    For whatever reason, people in general seem to prefer to tear someone down - than build them up. I.e. most of those posters, not knowing you OR your meta, are more apt to look at your successes and decide it's your meta that sucks - instead of simply admitting, "Hey... maybe this guy is just pretty good." I don't know what it is, but people in general seem to feel more comfortable criticizing than praising. But maybe that's just me being jaded on humanity as a whole. ;)

     

    Granted, the chaos book isn't the strongest out there. But I definitely do not agree with the notion that 'top tier players with top tier lists are unbeatable'. We're rolling dice - therefore -anyone- is beatable.

     

    It just might not be very -likely-. ;)

     

    But I've seen this argument in forums for almost every game I've been apart of. Confrontation, 40K, WM, Infinity - doesn't matter. Someone at some point states they've had success with a certain tactic/army/list/mode/etcl, and someone in a state of disbelief invariably insinuates (or flat out claims) that your opponents must just plain suck, as a method of explaining-away the success that was mentioned. It's a weaksauce argument, in my opinion, meant mainly to antagonize and rile you up. In this case - it worked, especially when the guy saying it really had nothing else to say.

     

    "Well... maybe your friends suck." 

     

    /eyeroll

     

    But that's just my 2 coppers.

     

    -Tim

×
×
  • Create New...