|
Post by mrbill on Dec 18, 2018 14:31:07 GMT
To me you do not need to touch a model. If you cast a spell you have obviously begun your activation. If you perform an *Action you have obviously begun your activation. He did not say "I am considering activating this unit and issuing an order". He said his unit leader issued an order. This is a specific activity that is spelled out in the rules as happening at the beginning of an activation. It is unreasonable to expect your opponent to rewind time at will. You may ask, but it is unsportsmanlike to ask and then refuse to accept the answer if it is not the one you want. To me once a model issues an order there is absolutely no question that you have activated that unit.
|
|
|
Post by Gamingdevil on Dec 18, 2018 14:35:36 GMT
Does it actually say anywhere in the rules that verbal intent starts a unit's activation? This isn't a snarky comment, I am generally curious. I think most people talk out loud when they are playing and often say things and decide otherwise. If nothing has been moved then I would never prevent someone from doing a different action. Even if something has been moved but can easily be placed back that is fine with me personally, though I understand how others would feel differently on this point. No, it doesn't. That's what I would contest, and why I would want to know when exactly a units activation starts. I'm in the camp that an activation starts when a model is touched, not when you say what the model might do. In this event, the opponent spoke about their ability and the OP changed their mind before touching any models. On the other hand, does that mean the opponent shouldn't say anything until the active player starts to run or charge his model? "Oh, you can't actually go that far because you didn't get the order." That will in most cases create a game state that can not be easily reverted. The correct moment to mention would indeed be as soon as the order is issued. I would personally allow a take-back as long as nothing has moved, but by the letter of the rules I do not see this as mandatory. To quote something the Infernals like to say: "The rules don't say what to do when you don't follow the rules." Normally as long as the game state hasn't changed, it's easy to do a rollback. This is mandatory, if still possible, when an error (these guys charged, but they couldn't) has occurred, but not when it was a player error that doesn't result in an illegal game state (these guys want to charge, but can't). Just playing devil's advocate here in saying that the guy wasn't technically in the wrong, he just lost the moral high ground by enforcing a minor slip-up.
|
|
privvy
Junior Strategist
Formerly The Nomad on PP's forums
Posts: 317
|
Post by privvy on Dec 18, 2018 15:27:46 GMT
To me you do not need to touch a model. If you cast a spell you have obviously begun your activation. If you perform an *Action you have obviously begun your activation. Yeah, this is much more cut and dry, you're actually doing an action with a model that affects the current game state rather than just saying what you're planning. A star action either places a token or causes an attack, while spell uses focus and requires rolls and/or tokens. This is different from just saying an order because it isn't just saying an order, it's activating an ability. If it's a star action that just puts down a token, and you take it back before you move, I think most people would allow a take back, even in a tournament as you haven't really done anything but verbalized at that point. If I could take it to the farthest extreme, that is completely unreasonable, if you say "I'm going to have this Idrian unit charge..." and before saying what you charge or even touch a model, you decide on a better move so you say "No wait, I'm going to activate the Hierophant before that." Since what you did does not affect the game state, would it be considered activating the Idrians? Or to go even more unreasonably far, what if you said "I'm going to have the Idrians..." and then decide otherwise. Since you mentioned the unit, is it considered activated? Realistically, I should just ask on the PP rules forum and drop it here, but I'm super thankful to those of you that are entertaining my idiot self
|
|
privvy
Junior Strategist
Formerly The Nomad on PP's forums
Posts: 317
|
Post by privvy on Dec 18, 2018 15:33:56 GMT
No, it doesn't. That's what I would contest, and why I would want to know when exactly a units activation starts. I'm in the camp that an activation starts when a model is touched, not when you say what the model might do. In this event, the opponent spoke about their ability and the OP changed their mind before touching any models. On the other hand, does that mean the opponent shouldn't say anything until the active player starts to run or charge his model? "Oh, you can't actually go that far because you didn't get the order." That will in most cases create a game state that can not be easily reverted. The correct moment to mention would indeed be as soon as the order is issued. I would personally allow a take-back as long as nothing has moved, but by the letter of the rules I do not see this as mandatory. By the rules, the game is an open information game, so when you say what you're going to do, the opponent is supposed to tell you any active effects that could prevent that. In this case, it was on the active player because he did say a token was placed but he did not ask what the token meant. Once a model is moved, the game state is changed to the point where a take back is up to the graces of your opponent. So we agree on that point. The letter of the rules does not state the difference between intent to do an action and acting on the intent. It might be a razor thin line, and it wont matter in 99% of games, but it's something to think about in a tournament setting. Also, double posting because I suck at multiquoting and whatnot on these forums
|
|
|
Post by mrbill on Dec 18, 2018 15:40:15 GMT
I am in the minority. I explicitly say "I activate this [unit,model]" at the beginning of every single activation. Clarity of communication goes a long way to keeping the peace. I personally would not hold a person to anything if the game state had not changed. This game is complex, though and keeping track of the game state and who has activated and done what while planning your next turn is difficult enough without having someone activating then inactivating then reactivating units. I agree with Gamingdevil on his assessment of "not technically wrong, but he lost the moral high ground." OP then one-upped him on losing the moral high ground by taking his models and going home over the matter. If I were in that situation I would likely have played it out, but another option I have used when I obviously made a mistake that would cost me the game is to say "OK, you win. Would you mind humoring me and seeing how the game would have played out if I hadn't made that mistake?".
|
|
|
Post by cgdeth on Dec 18, 2018 15:42:49 GMT
To me you do not need to touch a model. If you cast a spell you have obviously begun your activation. If you perform an *Action you have obviously begun your activation. Yeah, this is much more cut and dry, you're actually doing an action with a model that affects the current game state rather than just saying what you're planning. A star action either places a token or causes an attack, while spell uses focus and requires rolls and/or tokens. This is different from just saying an order because it isn't just saying an order, it's activating an ability. If it's a star action that just puts down a token, and you take it back before you move, I think most people would allow a take back, even in a tournament as you haven't really done anything but verbalized at that point. If I could take it to the farthest extreme, that is completely unreasonable, if you say "I'm going to have this Idrian unit charge..." and before saying what you charge or even touch a model, you decide on a better move so you say "No wait, I'm going to activate the Hierophant before that." Since what you did does not affect the game state, would it be considered activating the Idrians? Or to go even more unreasonably far, what if you said "I'm going to have the Idrians..." and then decide otherwise. Since you mentioned the unit, is it considered activated? Until a model does something affecting the board state it hasn't activated. I tend to 1) think out loud and 2) tell my opponent what I'm trying to do. But just because I say I'm going to charge with x unit, doesn't matter till I take the model and move it.
|
|
crimsyn
Junior Strategist
Posts: 389
|
Post by crimsyn on Dec 18, 2018 15:45:34 GMT
Just playing devil's advocate here in saying that the guy wasn't technically in the wrong, he just lost the moral high ground by enforcing a minor slip-up. And this is the crux of the matter. Technically, you can be really hard on your opponent and enforce minor slip-ups and gotchas, and win games by calling them out when they say things like “I cast razor wind... I mean wind rush. Heh, I get those two mixed up all the time” But... playing like that sounds like a miserable and frustrating experience for both parties.
|
|
|
Post by dirtyharrypotter on Dec 18, 2018 16:00:17 GMT
Yeah, this is much more cut and dry, you're actually doing an action with a model that affects the current game state rather than just saying what you're planning. A star action either places a token or causes an attack, while spell uses focus and requires rolls and/or tokens. This is different from just saying an order because it isn't just saying an order, it's activating an ability. If it's a star action that just puts down a token, and you take it back before you move, I think most people would allow a take back, even in a tournament as you haven't really done anything but verbalized at that point. If I could take it to the farthest extreme, that is completely unreasonable, if you say "I'm going to have this Idrian unit charge..." and before saying what you charge or even touch a model, you decide on a better move so you say "No wait, I'm going to activate the Hierophant before that." Since what you did does not affect the game state, would it be considered activating the Idrians? Or to go even more unreasonably far, what if you said "I'm going to have the Idrians..." and then decide otherwise. Since you mentioned the unit, is it considered activated? Until a model does something affecting the board state it hasn't activated. I tend to 1) think out loud and 2) tell my opponent what I'm trying to do. But just because I say I'm going to charge with x unit, doesn't matter till I take the model and move it. So, when you declare a charge, and that charge triggers all kinds of effects before you even move, you'd claim you didn't even activate when those effects you forgot about don't suit you after your opponent explains the consequences of that charge declaration?
|
|
|
Post by cgdeth on Dec 18, 2018 16:14:01 GMT
Until a model does something affecting the board state it hasn't activated. I tend to 1) think out loud and 2) tell my opponent what I'm trying to do. But just because I say I'm going to charge with x unit, doesn't matter till I take the model and move it. So, when you declare a charge, and that charge triggers all kinds of effects before you even move, you'd claim you didn't even activate when those effects you forgot about don't suit you after your opponent explains the consequences of that charge declaration? What effects; all I can recall is things like counter charge that happen after the model has moved. Also if you're going to be that technical about it, just because I said I was going to do X doesn't mean I said when I was going to do it. Ex: I am going to charge with my unit of Knights Exemplar. But first I'm going to activate Durst and put boundless charm on them. If you interrupt me before I've moved anything you're tipping your hand and that's your fault. But again why would anyone play that.
|
|
|
Post by P'tit Nico on Dec 18, 2018 16:27:56 GMT
So, when you declare a charge, and that charge triggers all kinds of effects before you even move, you'd claim you didn't even activate when those effects you forgot about don't suit you after your opponent explains the consequences of that charge declaration? What effects; all I can recall is things like counter charge that happen after the model has moved. Pandemonium Arcana can be triggered when a model issues the order. This is before any model moves.
|
|
|
Post by dirtyharrypotter on Dec 18, 2018 16:46:42 GMT
So, when you declare a charge, and that charge triggers all kinds of effects before you even move, you'd claim you didn't even activate when those effects you forgot about don't suit you after your opponent explains the consequences of that charge declaration? What effects; all I can recall is things like counter charge that happen after the model has moved. Also if you're going to be that technical about it, just because I said I was going to do X doesn't mean I said when I was going to do it. Ex: I am going to charge with my unit of Knights Exemplar. But first I'm going to activate Durst and put boundless charm on them. If you interrupt me before I've moved anything you're tipping your hand and that's your fault. But again why would anyone play that. I agree with that example, thinking out loud should of course be possible. But take a carefull look at the OP, how he quotes the situation: "unit X now gets this order". That's beyond thinking out loud, that's as much an action as rolling a die. In fact it's the only way to issue an order. If you just started moving models your opponent wouldn't know what you were doing, the verbal component is essential. The opponent could have allowed for a different course of action, but don't make it sound like it's obliged or even gentlmanly, "sure, you made the one mistake that could actually cost you the game and save my skin, now don't do that and go kick my ass". You could and in fact we often do, but never would we feel entitled to it, nor think less of someone who doesn't.
|
|
Ganso
Junior Strategist
Posts: 932
|
Post by Ganso on Dec 18, 2018 17:44:32 GMT
I cannot believe this. So, the guy is losing right? The one hope he has to send this game is for the opponent to make a crucial mistake, which in fact happens, and you all think he's a nobhead for taking advantage of it? All this talk about playing the game through to the end and learning more from that, it just doesn't apply here. The game was in the bag, and then giftwrapped and given away. At least that's how I read it. What more was there to learn? Edit: If there's one thing I learned from situations like this it's to never give up untill it's a 100% over. Because these things happen all the time. Lucky win? Sure. But you can't accuse such a winner of not playing it through to the end. Quite the opposite in fact. On the other hand, I like my opponents to play games at the Master's level, and players that constantly win Masters don't win on gotchas. If my opponent forgets I have Countercharge I'll remind him before he sets down a model, because people in Masters don't forget those things. The benefit I get from doing this is that I very quickly learn not to rely on cheap tricks to win games because I'm respecting my opponents intellect. Clubbing baby seals over the head is just an empty victory.
|
|
|
Post by sand20go on Dec 18, 2018 20:27:53 GMT
I cannot believe this. So, the guy is losing right? The one hope he has to send this game is for the opponent to make a crucial mistake, which in fact happens, and you all think he's a nobhead for taking advantage of it? All this talk about playing the game through to the end and learning more from that, it just doesn't apply here. The game was in the bag, and then giftwrapped and given away. At least that's how I read it. What more was there to learn? Edit: If there's one thing I learned from situations like this it's to never give up untill it's a 100% over. Because these things happen all the time. Lucky win? Sure. But you can't accuse such a winner of not playing it through to the end. Quite the opposite in fact. On the other hand, I like my opponents to play games at the Master's level, and players that constantly win Masters don't win on gotchas. If my opponent forgets I have Countercharge I'll remind him before he sets down a model, because people in Masters don't forget those things. The benefit I get from doing this is that I very quickly learn not to rely on cheap tricks to win games because I'm respecting my opponents intellect. Clubbing baby seals over the head is just an empty victory. A) Dirty - I wouldn't say it was "in the bag" but the game state at the end of top of 2 probably favored me because 1) I had accounted for the arcana, the "only play one a turn" rule and how I would work to reduce the efficacy of them and 2) had layered the piece trading so that I could present multiple threats. It is a dice game. We needed to see what the Cage Rager and the S&B over on the other flank could do and what would have progressed as I needed to spend multiple turns eliminating idiotic G. Swarms with just one magic weapon holder in the army. But because of positioning I would say I was up 66-33%.
B) Critical mistake is the issue here. Again, see A. But why I think PP DOES have issues is that A is not enough. And it wasn't a rube goldberg gotcha (which I can respect having played a lot of Karchev in Mk2). Literally - the "plan" banked on my BONEHEAD mistake of getting overeager to get the demo corp in rather than killing the crabbit first. Do that, no wailing. No post. My opponent essentially said his "plan" was me making that error. Ergo not reminding me it was in play, not calling attention to it. Poker face.
C) Playing it out - I can see both points but what would have happened on that right flank is that democorp on that side would have gotten into S&B number 2 with one charging dude. Might have lived the dream with a crit and spirit out but unlikely.. Child would have wacked out the three non shield walling SHocks. S&B number 1 would have gone and eaten the rest of the democorp. At that point just Kozlov and a Jugger against CHild, 2 S&B, 3 crabbits and 1 Swarm on that flank. Sure we COULD have played that out - Kozlov pretty much dies 45 minutes latter and I miss dinner with my kids. Packing up seemed pretty wise at that point - all I would learn is to "not suck" by remembering upkeeps - a lesson learned.
And A+B+C is why I worry about PP. As the game CONTINUES to add models, factions, theme benefits and rules it is ever harder to understand and account for everything going on. A common phrase on this site is that expect to lose your first 40 games. I would say my win percentage against my meta - with at least 2 teams plus off to ATC and them getting in 4-5 games a week vs. my 1 or 2 is running about 30%. I can't even fathom the challenges of somebody who is just getting in. The problem there is not 30% but 30% +several hundred dollars + 1.5 to 2 hours for each game. Remove anyone of those factors (less punishing learning curve, cheaper cost to keep up, quicker play) and it feels good to go. All three. Oiy......
PS. Let me add. If I wasn't a few thousand into Khador and Menoth and Minions I probably ALSO wouldn't stick it out. WM/H is "fun" not not really the fun I had say 2 or 2.5 years ago. At least locally it is all about practicing for large national events.
|
|
|
Post by P'tit Nico on Dec 18, 2018 21:19:08 GMT
And A+B+C is why I worry about PP. As the game CONTINUES to add models, factions, theme benefits and rules it is ever harder to understand and account for everything going on. You don't need to remember everything. You just need to ask your opponent what his spell does when he casts it. Stop blaming PP for your lazyness.
|
|
privvy
Junior Strategist
Formerly The Nomad on PP's forums
Posts: 317
|
Post by privvy on Dec 18, 2018 21:44:27 GMT
I can't even fathom the challenges of somebody who is just getting in. The problem there is not 30% but 30% +several hundred dollars + 1.5 to 2 hours for each game. Remove anyone of those factors (less punishing learning curve, cheaper cost to keep up, quicker play) and it feels good to go.
These are the challenges that almost everyone had to face that is currently playing. The cost has always been a factor, it's not cheap to make the minis and it takes time to assemble and paint them, too. That's what makes it a hobby. Game time and experience growth/gain can be mitigated. Start smaller. There's a reason battle boxes or 0 point games are the starting point. and then you slowly build up from there. If someone just jumps into 75 point games with a net list, they'll lose almost 100% of the time because they never took the time to play to learn interactions of models. If you take a few months to play 0 point games and 25-50 point games, you'll have a better time because you essentially learn the ins and outs of individual units before inter-unit synergy.
|
|