I've been playing 40k for about 2 years
now, I play pretty much once a week and I've attended about 12
tournaments over that period. I own well over 5000 points of Space
Marines/Blood Angels, 2000 points of Orks and about 1750pts of
Tyranids. I also read a large amount of blogs and listen daily to
several excellent podcasts. I think it's fair to say that I'm fairly
well immersed in the hobby, recently I think I've been able to put my
finger on something that has been bothering me about the game.
I like to think of myself as a fairly
relaxed gamer, I would certainly not consider myself WAAC or even
that bothered about winning. But despite that I do tend to come away
from some games (wins and losses) with a sour taste in my mouth and,
I am sad to say, that these can be both tournament and friendly
games.
I think there are a couple of reasons
for this, firstly rules interpretation. Sometimes I come away from
games feeling that the winner has been decided by whoever stood more
firmly behind their interpretation of a rule (or rules) or who was
more willing to be relaxed about a particular call on a grey-area of
the rules. This can and has gone for and against me in the past and
it sours both wins and losses equally. Cover saves for vehicles are a
perfect example of this, in the current meta-game vehicles are king
and keeping them alive is crucial to many a game-plan, so getting
cover saves can make or break a strategy. Proving that a vehicle is
50% obscured has surely lead to more arguments and disgruntled losers
than any other part of the 40K rule-set. Conversely I know I've felt
awkward after sticking to my guns on denying a cover save to my
opponent and then blowing up his vehicle.
The second thing that bothers me is bad
match-ups. OK, this is a big boy game and part of it is list
building, you don't need to tell me that I love list building. What I
am starting to object to though is lists that are so powerful that I
cannot play the game I want to play and expect to have any fun doing
it. This has been sparked by a list I have played a couple of times
over the last few months and perhaps I'm just not used to it yet,
indeed I used to think the same think about tri-Long Fang Wolf lists,
but at the moment I just would not accept a game against that list.
If I was drawn against it in a Tournament I would grin a bear it but
it would put a cloud over my day. Don't get me wrong, I'm totally
against comp restrictions in Tournaments, you should be able to play
a list any way you want to. As with the issue I have with rules
interpretation, I have also been on the right side of a bad match up
and it doesn't feel good either.
So I guess you're going to be thinking
something like “all right then genius, what do you propose to do to
solve these fundamental issues which spoil the game for you?”. Well
short of GW writing a perfect set of rules with no room for
interpretation supported by codices which are perfectly balanced
across the myriad of army builds they make possible, there's nothing
to do really. As I said before I fundamentally disagree with comp
restrictions, they are just someone else's interpretation of what
makes the game fun. In my opinion, the only fair way to play the game
is with the rules as written and make the best of the vagaries and
power variances, if that's just not good enough for you then get out
of the game and stop whining about it.
For my part I will continue to play
40K, though I'm not going to be playing as regularly as I used to.
Perversely I'll probably stick to playing tournaments rather than
friendlies, this is because I can pick the ones whose rules
packs/philosophies I agree with and I care slightly less about
feeling bad after playing someone I just met than someone I'm friends
with. Also I resolve to stop concerning myself with my final
tournament placing and just do my best to enjoy the weekend playing a
game that has got me by the gonads!
Feel free to post below if you agree,
disagree or have identified other things which bother you about 40K
and let the readers know what you're doing to make the game more
enjoyable for you.
I think the rules thing is difficult, since as humans, we all just want to be liked and it's a fine line between fighting your corner and being "that guy". I think in tournaments you shouldn't be afraid to go nuclear and call over a judge.
ReplyDeleteAs for bad match-ups, t'was ever thus. I'd love to know what the list was that you're having trouble against. As you say, it's probably just because you're not used to it yet...
When I read the title of this post I felt sure it'd be written by Darren!
ReplyDeleteGames like bloodbowl are brilliant cause there are no grey areas. That said they're also much simpler. It'd be almost impossible for GW to make the game black and white without losing some of the "realism". There are rumours the vehicle shooting will change in 6th.
My main problem is that some vehicles are easier to kill than they should be. A skimmer moving 24" is just as easy to hit as a land raider. I think they need to bring back to hit modifiers. I think the aim of 50% cover was to make the game simpler which it has but it also introduced ambiguity.
A skimmer moving 24" has turbo-boosted and thus has a 4+ cover save where a Land Raider has no cover save from movement, only if popping smoke and that's once a game. However, I do get your point. Maybe incremental cover saves based on movement distance for a skimmer would be more realistic. That being said, something that generic would only make Falcons and Wave Serpents that much harder to deal with.
ReplyDeleteRules interpretation can be an issue but I believe that if you know your rules well enough and can point them accurately to your opponent then you won't have a major problem. I can't recall an instance (okay exept once but it was partly my fault) when I had an argument with an opponent at a tournament and it took me more than a couple of minutes to show him what the truth was. Not because I am stubborn or anything but because I know how to find the rules quickly in the rulebook (have bookmarks and everything!).
ReplyDeleteBad matchups are an issue too. Especially if you are new to the hobby. Imagine a young kid just starting with Daemons and he is forced to play a GK army at a tournament. The horror! But I think you are in the hobby long enough to know what's going on. You got 4 armies already so you have enough models to build a good list for balanced playing.
Hate to take GW side again but I think your two main issues are a bit subjective. The first one has to do with bad opponents and it can apply to every game (as I can testify you from my MtG days) and you have enough models to not be affected by the second one (whereas a player who only played, say, Necrons could complain about that). Am I making any?