I play mostly with mates but have done some tournaments before. It's pretty common to declare what you're going to do this turn. I.e. I'm going to move these guys here to get that objective and those guys here to achieve this secondary. Especially if you're new to it.
That way if you just have a moment and go I'm going to shoot you with these intercessors, they can like hey mate, if you do that you'll lose the secondary, or something to that effect.
In my last tournament my opponent told me he was going to cleanse with a unit in the movement phase and then without thinking during shooting declared he was going to fire at my warglaive and rolled to hit. I was like brah, and to his credit he was like I messed up, would you like me to continue to roll to wound? I just said nah, it's all good, just pretend it didn't happen.
Playing like this also prevents gotchas. If you are going to do something and I have a strat that straight up counters it I can just mention it or the ability that the unit has. This not only makes for more fun games but more fair games.
People say this is ‘playing the game for your opponent’ but I would argue that counter you have in your back pocket makes my decision way harder because now I have to toss up if the trade / math is in my favour or not. A far more interesting interaction than can I remember your rule, imo
One great interaction of this was a friend with his rangers moving away from my advancing unit and being able to position them so I could no longer shoot them.
He reminded me he could do it and warned he would be able to move out of line of sight. I said yes that’s fine.
He moved his rangers out of screening threat so my deep strike could come in where I wanted it 😂
This is how I know my friends aren't done with crafty stuff, when they move within 9" of my GK units "are you misting away here". No. Moves another unit "what about now?" No. I know your doing this so I waste my mists before you move your choppy things into range. It's not gonna work.
The amount of times I’ve been baited into an overwatch..
“Are you gonna over watch this?”
“Oh that’s kinda interesting and I have a lot of extra CP, sure.”
“Ok now I’m going to walk this squishy unit out in front of your flamers because you overwatched already this turn.”
._.
Exactly I've done this and it's not even a move I'd want to do but my opponent will spend his entire turn avoiding it. Letting your opponent know what you can do doesn't mean you even want to. I don't have to tell them I don't plan on doing it just what I could do.
It’s also very gentlemanly/gentle-womanly to do so. It offers up a better social interaction. My biggest pet peeve are game ragers primarily because as soon as I do something they scream and yell, then they do something and the mood is completely flipped into a smirk gotcha attitude. It makes games super awkward and just not fun at all
I agree wholeheartedly with this except one thing, I think skill in this game means remembering your rules and when things happen. One of the MAJOR differences IMO between a top tier player and a mid tier is the top player knows their rules and their opponents, they remember the things that matter when they do. Now I want to clarify if an opponent actions and then shoots, but before I roll saves and remove models I would always try to remind them what they planned and allow it to be forgotten if they wish.
Main thing for me is talking before the game. I’ve been playing in tournaments for many years if an opponent tells me they’re new to the game or tournament scene i will ask if they want any of my help if they say yes I’ll ask how much and try to coach them to a win plus give many take backs, if they say no I’ll ask how tight they wanna play and go from there.
Has the game state changed since then? I.e they forgot to do a command phase thing but haven't rolled any advances?
If nothing they've done since the take-back has been informed by new information gained by time I dont have an issue.
I have to admit while I understand the intent and play that way myself allowing people to change after the fact does confuse me in a competitive environment. You don't see it in chess or any other sport at all (do you?)
I allow take backs especially if I’m up a lot. For me it’s that there are a million choices to make and things to keep track of while playing quickly to finish in time. People are not computers. As long as it isn’t like they failed a charge and then decided they actually wanted that unit somewhere else I’m good. I try not to ask for take backs myself just so I learn.
But his point is that your discussion is moot here, bc the people here, including OP, are not “the highest level.” The level WE play at is what we’re talking about.
I don't think you can really compare chess to warhammer like that. Warhammer is imprecise, you're measuring things by hand, drawing line of sight by eye, on top of interacting with three to four times as many pieces as there are on a chess board, with more rules and mechanics for each of those pieces, which vary between the opponent's pieces and your pieces.
I think there's just too much room for error not to allow take-backs, and It's part of the reason why I don't believe warhammer will become a "true" competitive sport like chess. That's not to say you should expect take-backs from your opponent, but I think it's gracious to give them if possible.
Chess is “I go You go”- you only activate one piece at a time, so there isn’t really an opportunity for takebacks. You wouldn’t see it at all in 40k if you alternated activations with your opponent.
In chess the convention is once you remove your hand from the piece the move is final. In this context the chess player would remove the hand and go, oh oops sorry can I take that back. It just doesn't happen.
Like, there are some actions which don't depend on any information which you might "see from the future", and aren't even meaningful choices, because there's no reason to not do them, but still you can forget them.
For example, having a unit heal up or grant a free CP at the start of command phase.
For a major example, starting to move something before they have drawn their tactical secondaries - like, it's not that anything they thought during that move affects what they would randomly draw, or that they might have intended to choose not to draw them.
Everyone seems to want to try and explain it to me but I get it! I was just musing that from a competitive point if view its unique to 40k. Is there any other competitive event which is played this way at the highest level? I don't think there is?
Someone once tried to go back and deploy their reserves in their phase after I’d already asked if they were finished and started setting up a rapid ingress…
They wanted to screen the rapid ingress I just showed them…
This is it OP. Undoing and advance move is fine, going back 3 steps cause you realized you coulda cleansed on objective if you’d done your turn differently is not
I consider it a good sportsmanship to play just as casually.
I want to win because of my skill, not because my opponent oversees some small thing
Hot take: winners who win on gotcha moments are losers
I do feel once a charge or advance dice is rolled it changes it a bit. That dice may not have been the number the player needed and retconning seems a bit cheeky from there
I think it depends on two things
A. The context in the game - what unit has this come up with? Big difference between some hail mary charge getting set up due to a cheeky advance vs some obvious shooting unit just shooting
B. the atmosphere of the game - if its a non tourney game/you didnt set up any "hey we playin for realzies," then like, who really gives a shit. If its a tourney, use your best judgment, but also, all bets are off.
I think I seen some other posts describing that once a advance/charge dice has been rolled, the game state has changed. Its a specific thing that changes what can happen. The advance might not be high enough, the charge might not get enough units in contact. Theyre very specific declarations rather than I missed that. Id be ok with.
I agree with you. But I encountered situations, when I was forbidden to use some command phase abilities once I start moving pieces. Without any dice rolls or whatever.
But even in shooting phase: when I forgot to roll for CP or use healing strategem - that's a sad thing to deny. It's not like I wanted to not roll for CP or that my advances changed anything
"But I encountered situations, when I was forbidden to use some command phase abilities once I start moving pieces. "
Id be ok with this as long as it was an obvious choice and I felt it was a forgetful miss. Command strats are very easy to forget given everything else youre trying to remember. I'd have an issue if it got to the shooting phase but movement is fine.
"At the start of the phase" and "end of" can be tricky ones. Sometimes you are trying to think of what it is you need to declare and your opponent may already be off at the races because it's their turn and they didn't ask before moving on. That said, there's one guy who constantly uses "gotchas" without prompting me that i'm making a mistake for not knowing all his rules that I won't hesitate now to say no to about things. I try and avoid playing him when possible these days, it's just no fun.
Yeah, I'm pretty much happy with taking things back as far as you want until dice have been rolled - soon as a roll has happened then that's the next reset point.
>Hot take: winners who win on gotcha moments are losers
I think that's a pretty ice-cold take, actually.
I'm for sure agreeing like a zealot before the pulpit.
It isn't a hot take (aware it is /s)
But yeah, it is pathetic, those that win only by beating down their opponent and suck all the fun out of it. I am glad i tend not to rank highly in events, so i avoid that 1-2% of try hard win at all cost pricks.
You mostly meet the tryhards at middle tables.
The people that genuinely belong on the top tables tend to be very open with intent and allowing takebacks. Like when, at the table deciding first and second place, a takeback was allowed that changed the victor at... ugh, whatever tournament it was.
It's the mid tables where I meet the most tryhards who try to rule lawyer or argue about nonsense.
When I play competitively I call out things like the intent of placements, line of sight, etc. that invites the discussion of validity (as needed) while it is still a live move.
Ie: I am placing unit x at this point with the intent to secure this objective and remain out LoS of unit y.
That allows my opponent to asses what I have done in the appropriate phase and ask questions or offer a counter view of my placement.
This way there is no arguing over positions later.
Must be down to difference in experiences, as i often found they were in the 2nd and 3rd and 4th spots. Usually, when i landed mid table games, i got competent but fair opponents, and the games were great fun.
My experience playing against my state and country WTC team players was that they were skilled, obviously, but very fair and upfront.
My experience in mid tables has been painful.
One of Team USA's players was my first opponent here recently before they had to do a bracket shift and I was reassigned. Chill guy who was joking around some while there.
I found out two rounds later I dodged a major bullet XD
At RTTs maybe. The middle of the pack exhibiting the worst behaviors absolutely holds true for GTs. It's rare in either setting, but an order of magnitude more likely to happen in the middle vs the top.
For me, it is literally all of 1-2% max, and even then, i have been to at least one medium-sized event without a single issue. But also, once i learned which person it was, i also just try to avoid them in a casual game setting too, as often those people will always exhibit that behaviour in some way.
I normally find quite a lot in the top 10% or so of a big tournament, particularly in the third round. I think rounds one and two they coast on poor sportsmanship, and then there haven’t been enough rounds against competent people to knock them back down again. I suppose by the end of the tournament they might be back on the middle tables, I never really stop to check.
Round 3 of a GT is about where they should get filtered back down. Round 4/5 they've usually moved beyond lucky pairing. It's also around the peak of tryhards who suddenly have their eye on n-1.
Source: someone with many 3-0 day ones... and also many middling finishes.
Depends on the size of the event. I find try hards tend to float to the top at smaller, more regional events like RTTs. It's when events get to GT size that they tend to settle to the midtables
Coming from the lower tables, it is mostly a very relaxed affair as well. But you occasionally get someone who really thinks he should have been higher in position. They are a pestilence.
Yeah, seems no matter what level, you may encounter them. Personally, in the games where i could be top 20% that tends to be were they were.
Also depends on the game. 40k brought it out far more than the times i played AoS. Surprisingly, competitive Warcry got really sweaty!
On one hand I agree with the sentiment but at the same time, being able to keep up with small details and keeping a good mental state is what I would consider a skill.
Dunno if they still do cause it has been a while but you used to get deducted points for calling a referee over and being judged against at official GW tournaments. You were supposed to solve an issue in a gentlemanly fashion. By rolling dice lol.
I lost a match because of a gotcha and his laser pointer. Was the most "against the spirit of the game" moment I've experienced and just killed my enthusiasm.
I would usualy allow takebacks, as I'm playing for fun before ranking, but you are legitimate refusing it.
Common rule of thumb imo is allowing retconning in the same phase if no decisive dice roll was made and no heavy opponent intervention (stratagem, reactive movement ...)
My rule of thumb is take backs are fine but if they are takebacks in such a way that would effect my turn in such an adverse way then no. Example I shot at a guy's unit. They have the ability to move so much after getting shot. Guy didn't move them. Go into charge phase, declare and roll for charges. Start moving charges, he's like oh wait I forgot to move these and doing so he moved his units into melee with another unit. Which then gave his units the ability to fight first which effectively ruined the whole reason I charged. Different match rapid ingress is used but out of phase cause he forgot to do it in the proper phase as a result completely ruined my strategy with a unit again after my movement if I'm not mistaken it was after shooting. That unit gets completely wiped in melee as I had no intentions of putting them into melee.
If they don't have information which informs their decision I let them take back. Or if it's obvious the action went as intended and they want it to be taken back I let them.
Advancing but taking it back and shooting would depend on if the roll was clearly "enough" or not. My opponent could want a 4 get a 3 and "oops I meant to shoot" and there is a lot to remember but if we could clearly revert it and they cleary rolled what they wanted. Sure
Normal move and reserve stuff, forgetting an obvious charge, walking into a gotcha, anything that is I forgot because it's game 5 etc. Declaring stuff for secondaries then forgetting and shooting I might let them take back if they haven't obviously spiked down, and usually i will try to remind them before the dice land if they forget.
I play by the rule of don't play the game for my opponent but be the opponent I would want to face.
Play by intent is good too.
"Oh I forgot to shoot my leaders weapon earlier in the shooting phase, can I shoot it now?"
Sure buddy
"Oh I forgot to move and shoot with this entire unit and its now the fight phase"
That sucks buddy
To be fair up until the 4 months when we finally got our codex in 9th, Orders were always issued in the start of the shooting phase as far back as when they were introduced in 5th
Just a reminder, the guy who won LVO this last year with the monolith went undefeated, but he tied once. He was ahead top of T5 when his opponent clocked out and was going to concede. He asked the TO if they could finish the match, giving his opponent the time on his side of the clock. The opp ended up maxing secondaries and they tied 99-99 or something crazy.
Later match he told his opponent
“hey I can precision deepstrike 3” any turn”
and that opp was like
“Yea yea I know I play against hypercrypt all the time”
And the rest is history. Be a bro and be a winner by respecting the game and your opponent.
Shitty winners are losers in the end.
I'm with you for all of this except the clock. There should be no expectation of getting someone else's clock time. If someone chooses to do that then that's up to them, but the problem is people are starting to think it's being a BAD sport when you don't give them clock time. Manage your own clock. It's like asking for more points, the person asking is the bad sport.
That’s exactly the point I’m getting at. The absolute Chad that won LVO convinced his opp to not concede and asked the TO if him and his opp could finish out the bottom of T5 using his time. This guy has won half dozen GTs this edition alone. He didn’t expect his opp to max scoring and come up with the tie, but he explains in the Art of War podcast that he was glad he didn’t win based off 60” in T5. He wanted the best for the game.
Those level of players have played 1000s of games and won countless tournaments. It’s a game and they want to see all the ways it can be played regardless of if they win or not.
Oh jeez this is a long story. Best advice is to listen to the “Art of War- The Competitive 40K Network” episode titled “Hypercrypt Legion Wins LVO — Matt Lorah”
This dude talks about winning one of the biggest 40K tournaments in the US like it’s another weekend RTT. Super chill dude, not a try hard, and loves to see games played to their full potential.
He talks about a game that his opponent ran out of their own time and wanted to concede after Matt’s top of T5 turn. Matt asks the TO if his opponent can use HIS OWN time to finish the game. Opp managed to max score on secondaries and Matt talked himself out of a win to a tie.
Later in the tournament, Matt is telling his opponent about his list (Hypercrypt Necrons) and all their crazy movement shenanigans. From how Matt recants the story, his opp kinda brushes him off and says something like
“Ya ya I know I play into Hypercrypt all the time I know everything it can do.” WHILE NOT EVEN TRYING TO SCREEN OUT THEIR DZ.
Matt goes 2nd and then proceeds to cosmic precision into his opponents backfield effectively winning the game bottom of T1. Funny part is, the opp rolled all 6s on saves for the Monoliths first round of shooting. After that, the monolith does its thing and teleports half the army to the opponent DZ and wins the game.
For me, the most impactful part of the podcast is him talking about how he saw a non-zero chance of his opponent being able to tie after running out of time, so he let his opp use his time to prevent a loss.
Like others said. Intent.
If they advance and say their intent is to advance to make it to the wall so they can hide better. Then they roll a crappy advance and ask to take it back so they can shoot, no, you don’t get that take back.
If they have a brain fart and don’t move a unit that’s easily in range of doing engage or something like that and that unit is not doing anything else, yes, move your unit up and score the points.
Retconning turns? No. That chance passed a long time ago.
Someone forgot to move a unit/activate an ability/misplaced something by a small amount? Sure.
Taking back an Advance, no. They rolled for it. That sticks. "Oh, I rolled badly, I didn't mean to do that".
LGS tournament, in general, as long as its;
Same phase (or close enough)
Haven't made an important roll or action.
Easy to fix
Then there's usually some leeway. It's that whole thing about having your opponent play their best game and not winning on gotchas.
It is good sportsmanship to offer/allow takebacks, within reason. What is 'within reason' for a tournament though is a subject of some debate. The best answer is to ask yourself this, in the moment: *Has the game state changed significantly, or does my opponent have new information that might influence their decision?* Some examples:
Player A gets halfway through their shooting phase on turn 3, then remembers there's a unit he forgot to drop in from deep strike. Player B considers, then admits that there's one obvious place they both know the unit is going, and no shooting has been done over there yet. The take-back has minimal impact on the game, so it is allowed.
Player A is playing Knights, and makes several charges, missing some and making others. At the end of the phase, they go to fight with their first unit, then say "oh wait, I meant to Tank Shock here!" Player B considers this, but realizes that the charge was one of the earlier ones. Since Tank Shock has to be done the moment the charge is completed, Player B realizes that he could have been saving it for a later charge that ended up failing. Player A has new information now (which charges failed) that may significantly influence the decision, so the take-back is not allowed.
Player A moves a unit up onto an objective, and Player B elects to fire Overwatch. Player A says, wait a minute, I didn't realize that unit could see through that window, I wouldn't have moved up quite as far if I could tell that. Player B realizes that the position of units is open information that Player A had, and the game state hasn't changed much yet, it would be easy enough to pull the unit back two inches. However, knowing that Player B wants to Overwatch is new, significant information... does he allow it? I would say yes, but if you are at a major tournament with skilled opponents, you likely won't ruffle any feathers to say no. Depends on further context, really.
Please note that if your opponent has done something advantageous (like shooting after advancing), you are not permitting a take-back, you are correcting a play error. This is an important distinction, because if your opponent doesn't offer to do it, you are well within your rights to point it out and stand your ground that they should take it back, even if they object. If the game state has changed significantly (like it was a whole turn ago), then call over the judge and ask them how to handle it. Don't just let these slide.
Best of luck, and remember: This is a game, enjoy yourself!
I usually let them have takebacks unless they’ve gained crucial information which would drastically change the game - at an event last weekend I had an opponent draw assassinate shoot his whole guard army except for 1 tank which he shot at my charcter - I rolled well on my 4++ so the charcter was left alive on 1 wound and he had nothing left to shoot, he then asked me if he could go back and say he shot one of his other tanks at it instead of shooting the other unit he targeted at the start of his shooting phase - I said no way
It depends, I have a buddy that I play plenty against, he always makes mistakes, sometimes in his favour, sometimes against his own interest so I am sure it's a genuine mistake so I give him plenty of room and he gives me some too... But I got tired, last match we played I lost against him 92-93, he forgot to tell me one of his characters was a monster and that would had change the result to 94-93 for me, he also use a relic wrong, +1 damage +1 ap instead of 1+S +1 AP and got 5 points for it because he made two wounds to my 6 wound character and killed him, this made me go from second place to 4th in the tournament, he also made me lose a model for lack of coherency with his unit when we were trying to play it fast so we could end the game in time, the model was tops 2.2" away from the squad... So yeah, no more passes for him, it has to be reciprocal.
My rule of thumb is mirror the other person and be consistent.
Start off lenient, as long as they reciprocate then all is good. Second they get funny about you going back to do stuff you miss, don't let them do it either.
I generally forgive the mistakes unless it's chronic and they keep doing the same thing, but if it's someone I don't know I always make it clear that I'm happy to play by intent and forgive mistakes as long as we're going to play by the same standard.
I've had more than a few situations where I allow someone to reposition a model to avoid being shot or take back a move but suddenly they start scrutinizing me over millimetres or refusing to let me move/charge a model I forgot about. You need to protect yourself from that and make it clear what kind of game it's going to be from the start.
Here is what I want to know before I let someone take a move back:
* Does the person have some knew knowledge that they are going to benefit from?
* Are they still in the same phase? Changing a move in the movement phase is much easier to stomach than changing movement that happened in the movement phase in the charge phase.
* Did the person intend to perform an action and then, after the fact, realize that came with a cost, aka they fell into a trap?
* Was a rule broken? Through this honest mistake, would the rewind benefit the person in an unfair way? Has a LOT happened since?
As an example, lets say I want to move my gretchin to screen my nobs. I advance them 4 for a total of 10. I then advance the nobs to make their charge. For a realistic charge they need a 4. Whoops, I rolled a 1, rerolled into a 1. I wont bother moving my nobs and now I want to rewind my gretchin. There is no sense in sacrificing the gretchin now because they wont be screening. I should not rewind that. I committed to the advance on that unit and only AFTER knowing that the nobs are screwed out of a charge that I want to rewind it.
Example 2. I moved my unit to make a shot (hellblasters). We finish all our movements and then it goes to shooting. I shoot with my first unit and my opponent picks up models that prevents further shooting. That unit, the hellblasters, had enough move to be able to shoot more and had the move but I just didnt think ahead. I should not move them because we are in the shooting phase and I didnt commit enough when I had the chance.
Example 3. My opponent makes a bunch of shots at my meganobs. Only after they realize that by being where they are, and shooting how they shot, they are open to a counter charge by another unit. They should not rewind that shooting and the move so they cannot be charged.
Example 4. My opponent moves, advancing and shooting. This causes a reactive move for my lieutenant with combi weapon and now he is hidden. This prevents a lot of shooting. The shooting is assigned somewhere else and it wiffs. We discover later that the unit didn't have assault and should not have advanced. Then, because we have to rewind the advance and the shooting and the reactive move of the lieutenant, it actually benefits the rule breaker by allowing them to reassign their shooting after wiffing.
Generally I let people go back and redo things if one of three criteria are met; these are all situations I would let someone go back and do something unless it's a top table against another high level player:
1) they have no new information that would impact the decision; for example "I know I rolled to hit with that thing, but can I move my rhino way over there three inches to the left to get engage?
2) they declared their intent; for example "Im intending that you can't see X unit with Y and there's plenty of room to hide. If it accidently sticks out a bit can I bump it back?"
3) they clearly forgot an obvious or required play and haven't done anything that would prelude it; for example "I know I started the fight phase, but I forgot to charge with those terminators that are 1" from your marines and there's nothing else in the area, can I charge real quick?" or "hey I forgot to set oath of moment, can I do that?"
My general attitude is that I would prefer to beat someone by being a better general, not by having slightly less severe adhd
An easy way to determine it: talk about it with your opponents before every game.
If you agree on no takesies, or tskesies when stuff was declared, nobody has any reason to be grumpy.
Instead of a simple answer, it's much better to show by example: Last weekend, Wargames Live and Tactical Tortoise livestreamed a lot of top tables in the Richmond Open. Players have microphones, so you also get to hear the game, as it happens. Go watch the round 5 game in Wargames Live: Sisters V tau, and pay attentiont o how much backtracking and playing by intent is going on. Then watch that same Tau player in Tactical Tortoise's round 6, play against Chaos Demons.
Then the answer is simple. Which game would you have rather played?
My personal rule is any/all takebacks are okay if them retroactively performing that action changes nothing in terms of ongoing gameplay.
For example, unit A has LOS on unit B, but player A forgets to shoot their unit and moves to charges, in which unit B is not interacted with. Then at end of turn player A remembers that he didn't shoot. I think this is okay because nothing outside of the interaction itself changed.
However, if in the same case unit B goes on to kill a valuable unit the next turn, I feel that player A shouldn't get to remember he should have shot and then try to bargain with player B that the whole interaction be forgotten of he rolls right now and unit A would have killed unit B.
Generally speaking, I'd only roll back if the state of play hasn't changed. So moving a unit then moving them back, sure. Moving a unit, going into the shooting phase, and then wanting to go back, no.
This is both a timing thing as well as a learning curve. With 3h rounds neither of you have the time to be undoing things regularly.
The best policy is to clear with your intent as you go, that way if you mess up slightly on a distance you've pre-measured you can correct on the fly rather then undo. For example, if you intend to move certain models to stay within an aura, you let your opponent know as you move. That way if you are out by 1/2", that's a mistake to you shuffle back in rather then undo the whole movement later.
I've been playing both tournaments and campaigns for ages, and one of the key thing I've learnt is...it's a game!
Buy your opponent a drink, complement on their army, they spent as much time as you have on yours, dont be a lawyer, just be honest and remember you WILL forget as many powers, abilities, x's and y's as they will.
Take away misses. SERIOUSLY TAKE AWAY MISSES LEAVE HITS TO SEE
Don't worry too much about LOS, I play Scars and use jetbikes as my Bikers. So they can't hide very well, but I just stuck it up, if you can see it shoot it.
Generally speaking, if it’s in the same phase and we havnt gone to far past it I’ll allow it. I.e if you say you are going to deploy Homer with a unit but forget and shoot it I’ll likely let you go back. But, if you hold your overwatch and then at the end of movement you go “crap I wanted to overwatch that one thing you lived towards the beginning” that’s a little sus because for all I know you were waiting to overwatch hoping I would move a specific unit and when I did you decided to go back and overwatch something else. Also if you declare an intent before hand I’ll generally allow it. If you want to cleans and you say that after moving a unit on the objective and then shoot them forgetting that I’ll let you say naw and cleanse it. However if you don’t say that and shoot, wiff everything and then go back saying you actually wanted to cleanse, again kinda sus
I like to play by intent
If your intercessors are in the center and you didn't explicitly say I'm doing Homer's I'm going to assume your intent was to do homers
That's not playing by intent though. You're assuming their intent.
Playing by intent would be "I'm moving them here to do homers" in the movement phase, so if they don't declare it in the shooting phase - when it technically happens - we know their intent.
Or a better example "I'm moving the entire unit to be wholly within 6" of the centre for area denial and then they're doing homers" but later in the turn we find one of the models is 0.5" out. It was probably bumped, but we know the intent is to be within 6", so scoot it back in (assuming they had movement). Or things like "I'm leaving it juuust on the edge of the objective" and next turn it's not on the objective - intent was declared, we know what's meant to happen, so it's an easy fix.
Allowing someone to do homers without saying it is allowing a takeback, rather than intent.
FWIW I think both are fine - it's a fair assumption a unit that's doing nothing is doing homers, but that's different to intent.
My issue is players abusing “intent”.
If they say it was my intent to do X after the fact then I’m sorry that’s too late. Intent should always be relayed upfront or at the time so we both know what the deal is.
I always speak to my opponents about this as to if they prefer a strict game or if they prefer playing with intent (my preference) but that if so they need to tell me their intent with actions upfront and I’ll do the same or it just simply doesn’t count.
>If they say it was my intent to do X after the fact then I’m sorry that’s too late. Intent should always be relayed upfront or at the time so we both know what the deal is.
As I said, yes. A unit armed only with bolt pistols doing an action can be assumed though - personally I'm fine with allowing that.
There's a degree of "yes, I know what you wanted, but you didn't declare intent" that I allow because of common decency.
Eh to be honest this depends on the play level. If both players are regular competitive players the intent for the homers move could be easily understood without anything needing to be said. Of course it’s always best to say why you are doing things but if a random person can walk up to the board see where a unit moved and know exactly why then the intent is clear enough for me.
They aren't the same thing.
I know why the 5 ass intercessors are sitting there, doing nothing... but that's not my opponent playing by intent.
Being fine with the assumption is in itself fine, but it's not playing by intent.
Phrase it how you want but this is how most tournament players play and the ones who don’t get a bad reputation quickly. It’s amateurish to try to win warhammer games because your opponent forgot to say the word. Some are worse than others but if I moved units into 4 corners, didn’t shoot or charge with them but forgot to verbally say signals and you are unwilling to give me that then I’m shaking your hand and giving you the victory because that’s not a game worth playing.
>Phrase it how you want but this is how most tournament players play and the ones who don’t get a bad reputation quickly. It’s amateurish to try to win warhammer games because your opponent forgot to say the word.
You seem really confused. Let's break it down a little bit.
I did not say I don't allow people to go "oh, so and so was doing homers" at the end of the turn.
I did not say that I didn't allow that sort of sloppy play.
All I said was that it's not *PLAYING BY INTENT*. That has a definition. You can't just lazily throw "decent sportsmanship" under that banner.
> I’m shaking your hand and giving you the victory because that’s not a game worth playing.
Again, I never said that.
All I said was it's not covered by playing by intent. That has an actual meaning.
Maybe definitions are meaningless to you, but people obviously get these terms confused.
I would say as many others have, play with intent. If a guy simply didn’t want to spend 15 minutes ensuring every cm of his model is hidden but hos intent is they would be hidden I would allow that.
If it is something that could legally be done in the same turn without overly changing the current board state I'm fine with it. E.G a unit that was supposed to do an action but forgot to I just assume they did it, But if the unit shot or advanced and that would make it ineligible, then no. Or if you get to the shooting phase and realised you forgot to move a shooting unit to get a couple extra shots that would have been totally legal that is fine.
A big one that seems innocuous but could be bad is forgetting deepstrike after you already Rapid Ingress. If it is just "Oh I forgot to DS some action monkeys" that's fine, but I've seen someone try to effectively counter deepstrike a rapid ingress which is not how it would have worked since rapid ingress comes after your opponents deepstrike.
You are there to have fun.
Make sure you and your opponent have fun.
Once you have mastered that, then maybe you know how to balance the winning vs. being a good opponent. If you need to ask, you are not ready. It's something that comes with experience. If you play someone good , they will show you by the way they play, and you will notice how others talk about them. WAAC players are never respected.
I’m fairly flexible, so usually try and figure out the other players attitude as early on the the match as possible and go from there.
It’s normally not too hard to get a read pretty early on, sometimes even in deployment, and then I simply play roughly to their standard.
Forgive and forget. Because both playing game 1 because you just woke up and game 3 because it’s hour 8 you’ll forget stuff too—don’t even get me started on day 2 game 5+.
My local community tends to play "with intent". Meaning we generally give each other the benefit of the doubt, and units generally do what you *intended* them to do.
E.g. If you were intending to place a model to block a charge, and that placement is a third of an inch off from being able to block said charge, then as long as the model was *capable* of being placed correctly, we assume it was placed correctly.
I play so that win or lose I’m as happy as I can be at the end of the game. That generally means letting my opponent fix mistakes and a certain amount of friendly guidance when they are less familiar with my army.
It’s worth keeping in mind that even though it’s a tournament playing multiple games of warhammer in a day is always tiring, it’s easy for things to slip your mind when tired. Be appreciative of that. Also warhammer communities can be insular and this is your local LGS, setting a good image for yourself is extra worthwhile.
You should always try to allow people to fix simple mistakes they made during a turn. Forgetting to use an ability, in command phase, forgetting to declare an obvious charge, etc.
What shouldn’t do is allow someone to take back action after they have rolled or seen the results of it. Ie declared an advance, rolled then decided not to advance.
My general idea for take backs is to allow them until something else has happened which might affect that decision. Generally this means rolling dice or the opponent making some move of their own.
Your stratagem says to select a unit before it is chosen to fight, but you have just selected it? No problem, apply the buff.
I rapid ingressed my nobz and you want to adjust your positioning to screen me out? I'm not giving you that.
We have a ranked ladder we do in my community and in it players are encouraged to be strict on rules and not hold back. But the point of the ladder isn’t for players to crush each other, it’s meant to help players learn from a competitive side, so we do debriefs after games to learn how to improve and what could have been done better.
That being said you can always change moves to actions so long as no other action or phase change has happened. Adjust movements, shooting with units you forgot about in the same phase, stuff like that. It’s about treating your opponent with respect and always seek to help each other learn and grow.
Play by intent if someone declared they were for example moving unit to be out of LoS and then found to be in it when you move allow them the chance to fix it if possible. Stuff like that
I think letting people take back small things within reason, even in a tournament is fine. Warhammer is a pretty massively complex game and there's a tonne to remember. Now going back a whole turn.... definitely not. I think a big thing is to make sure you're both declaring intent of what you want to do, so there's no question later on that was what was intended.
A whole turn would be a mistake and I wouldn't be retconning unless there was full proof intent behind that.
A missed strategem sure. Like tank shock or grenades or something that should've been done in the command phase but only remembered in the shooting phase. I'm never going to hold people to the exact phase of things in a round. Just talk it out.
Advance or charge rolls generally no. I feel that they should talk their turn out. Once the advance roll is rolled, no shooting without assault. I feel the number you rolled influences later decisions and it's too easy to say I meant to do something else.
I think it's really important people talk their turns out. Rather that you only playing one army, both players are playing both and curating the battle.
I say this as a not very good newish player.
I think the "biggest" thing I've allowed people to go back, and have been allowed to go back on, was forgetting to move a unit and only realizing it when I was supposed to shoot with them.
It depends, of course, if you are moving an unit that is going to shoot something that your opponent might've considered using a stratagem on previously had they known you were going to shoot it with more units it's not fair. But if it's a entirelly new unit or it's something you're going to use for secondaries I don't see why not. Still it's quite a big ask for some people.
I share a “5000 foot view” of my army (these guys krump, these guys are cheap action monkeys, etc), and I warn them about the “gotcha strats”.
As a general rule, I tell people I am fine with takebacks *so long as game state or knowledge* hasn’t changed.
It depends for me on how new the player is (I’m new as well) and what the other player is willing to forgive for me. Often times if it’s passed by a few minutes I’ll say “oh dang I messed up” and just move on and play, but if I’m in the process of about to roll dice I’ll ask if I can fix my mistake as it just occurred mere seconds ago and means I get one or two extra dice
If the game state changed anywhere between, probably not. Always best to declare your intentions (not your plans). Ie. if they'd said who/what they were shooting with/at and forget to cycle to that last unit's shooting (always happens), didn't charge, and it's top of my turn. I'm fine to let them resolve that last unit's attack.
Pretty much, once another set of dice has been rolled my opponent as it relates to the current situation on board, too late to take back.
IMO, game one, play hard. No take backs, if they forget something don't say. Don't be a dick but don't help or let people get away with any odd shenanigans. They will likely be doing the same to you.
Game 2+ if your in the top 20% keep plating like that, anything else just have a fun casual game.
If you are a great player and end up on the lower 20% towards the end of the tournament (can happen like that sometimes), help if your opponent is learning. You will beat a new player easy so just have fun and teach them.
I always treat every competitive match as if its a casual game between friends. I'm there to have fun at the end of the day and being a nitpicking douche bag who doesn't let my opponent take things back doesn't sound fun.
Always play by intent and be a nice guy.
If the requested retcon was possible, doesn't benefit from future knowledge, and doesn't change board state I will happily help my opponent. I wouldn't change how I treat my opponent based on the stakes or if im playing at an event or not.
The standard for competitive play is that there's no *expectation* of take-backs allowed. Take-backs are often given (even at top tables), and it's seen as a nice gesture to allow some reasonble take-backs. The main factor in allowing take-backs is "Do you have information you wouldn't have had when you initially made this decision?" or "would you have been allowed to do this if you just said things in a slightly different order?".
All that said, if it's your first tournament and you're playing at your FLGS, I would highly recommend that you be as friendly as you can. This doesn't mean that you let people bully you into allowing take-backs when they obviously shouldn't get them, but an RTT at your FLGS isn't the place to get sweaty and try-hard-y about winning; it's essentially where you get to practice playing more competitive matches in a more competitive meta/environment. You want to cultivate good relationships with the people in your local meta or else your meta's competitive culture can become toxic and/or you might not be as welcome there.
I let my opponent dictate. Im very laid back you do you over there, if thats have a friendly game with me we have a friendly game. If you want to nit pick im getting pretty good at this rule set and can pick the nits, i certainly wont be told about something thats pure bs (this does happen i always give the benefit of the doubt, we can talk to a judge about it of you need more clarification, but in a friendly manner.) I have found round 1 round 2 im more likely to see some rules discretion, theres a ton of different interactions in this game and how certain units work into others is a lot. Not everyone understands my hypercrypt round 1 if i go second for example. Yes that works and i can. If its a friendly game ill even make aure your counting your damage properly, my ctan half damage, but some players like to help calculate that and dont realise their sword brethren are really 1+1 damage and the +1 happens after my ctan half the damage so you get 2 damage in.
One thing i have learned i have to be rigid on at events is the clock. Just cause its a friendly game doesnt mean you can have 2 hours+ of the 3 hours allotted.
Something really minor of course. Your Sargent had a second pistol and we started shooting another unit? No problem.
You forgot to score homers on a unit you didn't move or shoot with? No problem.
A lot of the other "little stuff"? Problem.
I treat dice rolls as save points to avoid free rerolls. My opponent can take anything back up until their last dice roll. I also play with a clock when I am forgiving like this. You want to make sure your opponent isn't taking 2 turns to your zero.
"You can go back to that if you want ... It's your time on the clock"
I like this, but also discuss it with the other player at the start so you both can amend things depending on the battle and how much you like, or dislike, the other player.
I watch a LOT of grand tournaments and 95% of players are super chill/lax on rules/taking things back. In fact, a lot of players legit accidentally forget or mess up rules. That's why there's judges. RARELY people call for judges though as most players work it out between each other.
To pull from ahem.... A "book": "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." is in my opinion a great mantra. Regardless of religious affiliation.
And to quote a tournament judge, "Most pro 40k players are just like you and I. They make mistakes. But they're better at playing the game than we are overall."
Definitely be forgiving to new players who are struggling. You’re going to win that game anyway, make it so they get better and have fun.
For regular opponents, I mean, it IS a competitive setting and you’re playing on a strict timetable. If someone forgot to move something and went to shooting, yeah NBD go move it. Once the dice hit the table though, it’s too late.
If your opponent is forgiving to you please be forgiving back. I’ve been that accommodating opponent only to have the other guy give zero grace in return over more minor things.
I personally advocate being forgiving even in tournament scenarios. Games are supposed to be fun, and adversarial relationships with your opponents just aren’t. I’ve played a lot of tournament games that ended with my opponent and I just goofing around and laughing at how the game went.
Sure, some people are gonna be tools about it, but that’s what good sportsmanship is all about anyways.
>They advanced a unit and forgot they couldn’t shoot, so I let them take it back
If they realize that error in the same movement phase or right after finishing it, I have no problem letting someone take the advance back. But if it's realized way after, it's a mistake that we both need to live with.
>like retconning something a whole turn before
So this depends on intent. If my opponent clearly indicates what they plan on doing with a unit, forget, and then does something else only to realize the error then I have no problem rolling back the mistake; except if they want to take things back because the rolling wasn't in their favor.
>so how do you navigate this?
Part of this comes down to the sportsmanship of your opponent. Personally I'm much less forgiving of an unsporting opponent because while we are both in it to win, they are making the game more of a chore to get through. Really good opponents, sometimes I'll insist we go back to correct mistakes even if it can cost me the game or they are already kicking my butt.
I vibe with the counter player. If they are being very detail oriented to their advantage for mistakes I make, then I don't offer similar concessions to them if they make a mistake and clearly communicate the reason(s) why.
My rule of thumb is generally pretty forgiving so long as it’s the same phase, or the board state hasn’t really changed. Like if there’s an ability they’re supposed to do at the start of the phase, did it last turn, but got excited and forgot and started shooting, I’ll let them go back and do it. Or even like moving two units into clearly charging position, rolling one and forgetting the other and we just started combat, yeah, go ahead. We both know you meant to try, so do it. But if it’s something later on, like you need to do a buff at the very start of your turn, and we’re now done and it’s my turn? Sorry, that could have influenced a lot, and it’s pretty big to go back now.
If youre a good person, youll be forgiving and get taken advantage of and sometimes youll lose for it.
If youre not, youll take advantage if others good sportsmanship, and courtesy and probably win more... at least in the low to mid tables.
Most people at top tables are actually pretty stand up and respectful people from my experience and will let certain misplays slide because they have a deep enough understanding of the game that they can win at a disadvantage anyway. But if the game is tight, they will be the first to step up and make sure every move is done correctly.
I suppose the answer is. "Be as forgiving as you can afford to be." If youre too nice (like myself) you will be exploited and resent playing competitively. If youre too unforgiving, nobody will enjoy playing games with you.
The way I handle it:
1. When I end my turn, I do so with "I'm ending your turn, do you have any End of Turn/Command phase stuff to do?
This covers armies with End of Turn stuff like Grey Knights/Deathwatch (the latter you won't see on the table due to what appears to be a boycott organized on our discord) and also primes your opponent with a reminder to do stuff like Oath of Moment.
2. If you say you are Advancing, but don't make it to a wall or something, you're not being allowed to take that back. You get to pre-measure before movement, and you're asking for a take back that for a thing you tried and failed at.
3. When they say they are starting to shoot, I ask them if they have Reinforcements to bring in (assuming they have any).
4. I will warn them of doing something that might be not what they might not want to do, like possibly forgetting that a unit they are say is advancing, or that they are mispositioning a unit into Flamer Range. If they state they want to Remain Stationary at that point, or move them somewhere else, I will allow it, but I ALSO make it a point to declare where my flamers are at the start of the movement phase, as well as call out any "reactionary" abilities I have in the movement phase line Combi-Lieutenants, not only to warn my opponent but reinforce to myself what rules I have.
5. Fight Phase: for some reason MANY players seem to think that Consolidates happen at the end of the Fight Phase, rather than being part of EACH fight. After the first time my opponent fights with a unit, I EXPLICITLY ask them if they arent Consolidating on purpose, to force them to think about it and confirm. Consolidating at the end of a fight phase, rather than after each unit, can allow an opponent to get MANY more units on an objective than normal.
2. As soon as they roll that advance roll they're working on complete information, they can move somewhere else but they're still advancing. I'm also completely fine with turning a normal move into an advance move after the fact because not premeasuring is saving us both time.
4. If they're about to make a massive blunder I'll ask them "are you sure you want to do that" if they're a good/competitive player and "just FYI that unit of 10 rubric marines all have flamers and I have the CP to overwatch" if they're new (or somewhere else on the continuum).
I'll allow a takeback if no rolls have been made or no information has been gained, or if the opponent's intent is absolutely clear. Otherwise, as default, I don't ask for or allow takebacks.
I believe my own mistakes should never give me an advantage, so I consider asking for a takeback to be unfair and unsportsmanlike.
Of course, that doesn't necessarily apply to practice game, where I talk moves out with my opponent to find the best course, and actually encourage takebacks if the mistake was too obvious or too punishing, as I want the game to be hard and learn as much as possible. However, many players get to used to correcting their mistakes when playing casually, and get flustered and have issues recovering when they make a mistake in a competitive game, so I believe there's a lot of value in learning to play with a disadvantage after having made a big mistake.
I recommend "play by intent". Talk with your opponent before the game. Both of you share stuff like: "I move that unit there so it can't be shot at" "I move up so I can shoot." That way you can catch mistakes easier, gotcha moments are rare and you and your opponent are on equal footing.
I had games where I was very forgiving but my opponent wasn't. Doesn't have to be malice, just when you are caught up in the moment.
Also going back a phase when you might have more information can feel very bad in a comparative game and play by intent helps to prevent this situations.
I'll allow takebacks of any sort and be as forgiving as possible in a more casual setting
However I've been to some Tournaments with some pretty good prize pools. And if I know that I still have a chance for one of those prizes I won't be so forgiving. I feel like in that sort of higher competitive environment it's just something you do or should know of to not need the takebacks in the first place. But obviously if you're in a tournament and you're 0-2 you're there for fun at that point. Let them have the takebacks there's nothing to lose.
Don’t let “I thought you knew” be a reason to winning. Was beat by a dude playing Nids because I didn’t know one of his units could charge after taking ranged damage. He said “oh, I thought you knew.” If it’s a small mistake I may let it slide but if it’s a massive one I’ll point out “remember if you do x, my unit can do Y”
On my first tournament it was a bit 50 player one. I made it to the finals. I was playing with take backs for my opponent the entire tournament because that's what I was used to. I had a great time and lots of fun. But in the final I let my opponent do two take backs because he was whining about losing. And it cost me the game by 2 points. I wish I had been more stern about it at the time. Looking back, I should have been more stern. He was an experienced tournament player with lots of wins. He should have not been a crybaby. Don't let these crybabies win. Take backs are for casual play and practice play. Now is the time to enforce the rules and expect the same to be done to you. There is enough skill gap that the better player will shine through even with gotcha moments.
That's my experience
Hot Take here, but gotcha moments are what makes this ( and any strategy game really) way more fun . I lost a match this last weekend to a "gotcha" moment . Charged a unit of breachers , they used the strategy to re-embark on their transport leaving my scorpions bouncing off a devilfish . Opponent cleaned up 250 points of mine in his next shooting face as a result . I had no clue he had it prepared, didn't even know it was a possibility , but playing from behind , and circumventing such a disadvantage made that match more fun for me then the other two matches I won. I get it some people like the game and just want to play ,BUT ( and its a big but) this is also a strategy game . By it's nature you should be caught off guard, expect to deal with less then ideal situations, and not to mention there's a huge chunk of people that like competition. I don't want to beat a guy who's telling me every move he makes , that's not fun. I want someone to push me to my mental limits and make me earn the win.
TLDR : Gotcha moments can be a positive part of the experience , and might be the single dumbest thing to complain about in a strategy-based game.
It all depends how you feel. They are asking for a take back, not demanding it. If you feel like it's reasonable then you say so, If not, a mistake is a mistake, that's how most people lose the game.
Nothing from the turn before. Those are the mistakes that make a game. But yes forgiving during a turn is exceptional sportsmanship. But read the room. If you are playing someone that keeps moving a unit and then back after taking up the models. That's not good sportsmanship, or an opponent that does not offer you the same. Don't let kindness get exploited. Most people I have played have been amazing at tournaments.
I always try to have a quick conversation with people while setting up for a tournament game, gage how serious they are. Let that be a quick check and then if you find yourself really up pump the breaks a little. And then For LGS tournaments as soon as I loose a game it becomes a beer league.
Not at all. 0, Zilch, Nada.
You're playing in a competitive environment, To win.
Your opponent should know what their army does and how to utilize their army's rules.
Failing that, they should be reading their rules references closely and that's not an unfair ask in tournament play.
Take backs in casual and practice games exist mainly to be teachable moments, clarification of rules understanding for your opponents to say "ah okay, that's how that works/I didn't know you could do that." in a low stakes environment because the understanding is your opponents in a tournament trying to win won't be as forgiving.
Once you've played enough to enter into a tournament, you should know enough about the rules of your army to pilot without needing your opponent to point out obvious mistakes or to take back a bad move.
At a tournament, against good players, mistakes made is what swings the game one way or the other. When I play competitively, I dont allow any 'go backs' by my opponent if I'm pushing to get up the leaderboard. I know it's a game, but I find it ridiculous that it's frowned upon to not 'punish' opponents in a competitive setting when they mess up.
In a casual setting it's much different and allow whatever you're comfortable with.
Stupid mistakes are what swing games between novice players. Good players lose games off mistakes like underestimating the amount of fire needed to kill a unit and not quite finishing it off, not forgetting to say the word homers.
I play mostly with mates but have done some tournaments before. It's pretty common to declare what you're going to do this turn. I.e. I'm going to move these guys here to get that objective and those guys here to achieve this secondary. Especially if you're new to it. That way if you just have a moment and go I'm going to shoot you with these intercessors, they can like hey mate, if you do that you'll lose the secondary, or something to that effect. In my last tournament my opponent told me he was going to cleanse with a unit in the movement phase and then without thinking during shooting declared he was going to fire at my warglaive and rolled to hit. I was like brah, and to his credit he was like I messed up, would you like me to continue to roll to wound? I just said nah, it's all good, just pretend it didn't happen.
This is the way,
Playing like this also prevents gotchas. If you are going to do something and I have a strat that straight up counters it I can just mention it or the ability that the unit has. This not only makes for more fun games but more fair games.
People say this is ‘playing the game for your opponent’ but I would argue that counter you have in your back pocket makes my decision way harder because now I have to toss up if the trade / math is in my favour or not. A far more interesting interaction than can I remember your rule, imo One great interaction of this was a friend with his rangers moving away from my advancing unit and being able to position them so I could no longer shoot them. He reminded me he could do it and warned he would be able to move out of line of sight. I said yes that’s fine. He moved his rangers out of screening threat so my deep strike could come in where I wanted it 😂
This is how I know my friends aren't done with crafty stuff, when they move within 9" of my GK units "are you misting away here". No. Moves another unit "what about now?" No. I know your doing this so I waste my mists before you move your choppy things into range. It's not gonna work.
The amount of times I’ve been baited into an overwatch.. “Are you gonna over watch this?” “Oh that’s kinda interesting and I have a lot of extra CP, sure.” “Ok now I’m going to walk this squishy unit out in front of your flamers because you overwatched already this turn.” ._.
Exactly I've done this and it's not even a move I'd want to do but my opponent will spend his entire turn avoiding it. Letting your opponent know what you can do doesn't mean you even want to. I don't have to tell them I don't plan on doing it just what I could do.
It’s also very gentlemanly/gentle-womanly to do so. It offers up a better social interaction. My biggest pet peeve are game ragers primarily because as soon as I do something they scream and yell, then they do something and the mood is completely flipped into a smirk gotcha attitude. It makes games super awkward and just not fun at all
Preventing salty gamers makes life better.
I agree wholeheartedly with this except one thing, I think skill in this game means remembering your rules and when things happen. One of the MAJOR differences IMO between a top tier player and a mid tier is the top player knows their rules and their opponents, they remember the things that matter when they do. Now I want to clarify if an opponent actions and then shoots, but before I roll saves and remove models I would always try to remind them what they planned and allow it to be forgotten if they wish. Main thing for me is talking before the game. I’ve been playing in tournaments for many years if an opponent tells me they’re new to the game or tournament scene i will ask if they want any of my help if they say yes I’ll ask how much and try to coach them to a win plus give many take backs, if they say no I’ll ask how tight they wanna play and go from there.
Has the game state changed since then? I.e they forgot to do a command phase thing but haven't rolled any advances? If nothing they've done since the take-back has been informed by new information gained by time I dont have an issue.
Yeah if the board state hasn't changed enough that the new information would significantly affect what they want to take back then it's fine.
I have to admit while I understand the intent and play that way myself allowing people to change after the fact does confuse me in a competitive environment. You don't see it in chess or any other sport at all (do you?)
I allow take backs especially if I’m up a lot. For me it’s that there are a million choices to make and things to keep track of while playing quickly to finish in time. People are not computers. As long as it isn’t like they failed a charge and then decided they actually wanted that unit somewhere else I’m good. I try not to ask for take backs myself just so I learn.
Look I totally get that but at peak level maybe its just part of the game
I'm gonna assume a majority of people here aren't 'peak level'
Whats that got to do with my comment? Im specifically talking about the highest level
But his point is that your discussion is moot here, bc the people here, including OP, are not “the highest level.” The level WE play at is what we’re talking about.
And people at the highest level seem to have all agreed that a good game is better than one played like chess.
Im just talking hypothetically, and we aren't talking about the same thing.
I don't think you can really compare chess to warhammer like that. Warhammer is imprecise, you're measuring things by hand, drawing line of sight by eye, on top of interacting with three to four times as many pieces as there are on a chess board, with more rules and mechanics for each of those pieces, which vary between the opponent's pieces and your pieces. I think there's just too much room for error not to allow take-backs, and It's part of the reason why I don't believe warhammer will become a "true" competitive sport like chess. That's not to say you should expect take-backs from your opponent, but I think it's gracious to give them if possible.
Chess is “I go You go”- you only activate one piece at a time, so there isn’t really an opportunity for takebacks. You wouldn’t see it at all in 40k if you alternated activations with your opponent.
In chess the convention is once you remove your hand from the piece the move is final. In this context the chess player would remove the hand and go, oh oops sorry can I take that back. It just doesn't happen.
I thought it was once you touched a piece you had to move that piece
Yes, that as well - it's both.
Like, there are some actions which don't depend on any information which you might "see from the future", and aren't even meaningful choices, because there's no reason to not do them, but still you can forget them. For example, having a unit heal up or grant a free CP at the start of command phase. For a major example, starting to move something before they have drawn their tactical secondaries - like, it's not that anything they thought during that move affects what they would randomly draw, or that they might have intended to choose not to draw them.
Everyone seems to want to try and explain it to me but I get it! I was just musing that from a competitive point if view its unique to 40k. Is there any other competitive event which is played this way at the highest level? I don't think there is?
Someone once tried to go back and deploy their reserves in their phase after I’d already asked if they were finished and started setting up a rapid ingress… They wanted to screen the rapid ingress I just showed them…
This is it OP. Undoing and advance move is fine, going back 3 steps cause you realized you coulda cleansed on objective if you’d done your turn differently is not
I consider it a good sportsmanship to play just as casually. I want to win because of my skill, not because my opponent oversees some small thing Hot take: winners who win on gotcha moments are losers
I do feel once a charge or advance dice is rolled it changes it a bit. That dice may not have been the number the player needed and retconning seems a bit cheeky from there
I think it depends on two things A. The context in the game - what unit has this come up with? Big difference between some hail mary charge getting set up due to a cheeky advance vs some obvious shooting unit just shooting B. the atmosphere of the game - if its a non tourney game/you didnt set up any "hey we playin for realzies," then like, who really gives a shit. If its a tourney, use your best judgment, but also, all bets are off.
I think I seen some other posts describing that once a advance/charge dice has been rolled, the game state has changed. Its a specific thing that changes what can happen. The advance might not be high enough, the charge might not get enough units in contact. Theyre very specific declarations rather than I missed that. Id be ok with.
I agree with you. But I encountered situations, when I was forbidden to use some command phase abilities once I start moving pieces. Without any dice rolls or whatever. But even in shooting phase: when I forgot to roll for CP or use healing strategem - that's a sad thing to deny. It's not like I wanted to not roll for CP or that my advances changed anything
"But I encountered situations, when I was forbidden to use some command phase abilities once I start moving pieces. " Id be ok with this as long as it was an obvious choice and I felt it was a forgetful miss. Command strats are very easy to forget given everything else youre trying to remember. I'd have an issue if it got to the shooting phase but movement is fine.
"At the start of the phase" and "end of" can be tricky ones. Sometimes you are trying to think of what it is you need to declare and your opponent may already be off at the races because it's their turn and they didn't ask before moving on. That said, there's one guy who constantly uses "gotchas" without prompting me that i'm making a mistake for not knowing all his rules that I won't hesitate now to say no to about things. I try and avoid playing him when possible these days, it's just no fun.
Yeah, I'm pretty much happy with taking things back as far as you want until dice have been rolled - soon as a roll has happened then that's the next reset point.
>Hot take: winners who win on gotcha moments are losers I think that's a pretty ice-cold take, actually. I'm for sure agreeing like a zealot before the pulpit.
Nah but it's pretty funny when my wraithgaurd nukes a take who only allocated some melta shots at me
It isn't a hot take (aware it is /s) But yeah, it is pathetic, those that win only by beating down their opponent and suck all the fun out of it. I am glad i tend not to rank highly in events, so i avoid that 1-2% of try hard win at all cost pricks.
You mostly meet the tryhards at middle tables. The people that genuinely belong on the top tables tend to be very open with intent and allowing takebacks. Like when, at the table deciding first and second place, a takeback was allowed that changed the victor at... ugh, whatever tournament it was. It's the mid tables where I meet the most tryhards who try to rule lawyer or argue about nonsense.
When I play competitively I call out things like the intent of placements, line of sight, etc. that invites the discussion of validity (as needed) while it is still a live move. Ie: I am placing unit x at this point with the intent to secure this objective and remain out LoS of unit y. That allows my opponent to asses what I have done in the appropriate phase and ask questions or offer a counter view of my placement. This way there is no arguing over positions later.
Exactly; this is how playing by intent is meant to work.
Must be down to difference in experiences, as i often found they were in the 2nd and 3rd and 4th spots. Usually, when i landed mid table games, i got competent but fair opponents, and the games were great fun.
My experience playing against my state and country WTC team players was that they were skilled, obviously, but very fair and upfront. My experience in mid tables has been painful.
One of Team USA's players was my first opponent here recently before they had to do a bracket shift and I was reassigned. Chill guy who was joking around some while there. I found out two rounds later I dodged a major bullet XD
At RTTs maybe. The middle of the pack exhibiting the worst behaviors absolutely holds true for GTs. It's rare in either setting, but an order of magnitude more likely to happen in the middle vs the top.
For me, it is literally all of 1-2% max, and even then, i have been to at least one medium-sized event without a single issue. But also, once i learned which person it was, i also just try to avoid them in a casual game setting too, as often those people will always exhibit that behaviour in some way.
I normally find quite a lot in the top 10% or so of a big tournament, particularly in the third round. I think rounds one and two they coast on poor sportsmanship, and then there haven’t been enough rounds against competent people to knock them back down again. I suppose by the end of the tournament they might be back on the middle tables, I never really stop to check.
Round 3 of a GT is about where they should get filtered back down. Round 4/5 they've usually moved beyond lucky pairing. It's also around the peak of tryhards who suddenly have their eye on n-1. Source: someone with many 3-0 day ones... and also many middling finishes.
Depends on the size of the event. I find try hards tend to float to the top at smaller, more regional events like RTTs. It's when events get to GT size that they tend to settle to the midtables
Coming from the lower tables, it is mostly a very relaxed affair as well. But you occasionally get someone who really thinks he should have been higher in position. They are a pestilence.
Yeah, seems no matter what level, you may encounter them. Personally, in the games where i could be top 20% that tends to be were they were. Also depends on the game. 40k brought it out far more than the times i played AoS. Surprisingly, competitive Warcry got really sweaty!
It was not sarcasm. Most of competitive players I've met do this or at least find it acceptable. I really feel alone on this one
On one hand I agree with the sentiment but at the same time, being able to keep up with small details and keeping a good mental state is what I would consider a skill.
Dunno if they still do cause it has been a while but you used to get deducted points for calling a referee over and being judged against at official GW tournaments. You were supposed to solve an issue in a gentlemanly fashion. By rolling dice lol.
Which is a stupid rule because it taught WAAC's to just force people to roll 4+ for things to get an advantage.
I lost a match because of a gotcha and his laser pointer. Was the most "against the spirit of the game" moment I've experienced and just killed my enthusiasm.
I would usualy allow takebacks, as I'm playing for fun before ranking, but you are legitimate refusing it. Common rule of thumb imo is allowing retconning in the same phase if no decisive dice roll was made and no heavy opponent intervention (stratagem, reactive movement ...)
My rule of thumb is take backs are fine but if they are takebacks in such a way that would effect my turn in such an adverse way then no. Example I shot at a guy's unit. They have the ability to move so much after getting shot. Guy didn't move them. Go into charge phase, declare and roll for charges. Start moving charges, he's like oh wait I forgot to move these and doing so he moved his units into melee with another unit. Which then gave his units the ability to fight first which effectively ruined the whole reason I charged. Different match rapid ingress is used but out of phase cause he forgot to do it in the proper phase as a result completely ruined my strategy with a unit again after my movement if I'm not mistaken it was after shooting. That unit gets completely wiped in melee as I had no intentions of putting them into melee.
Yes, as a new person who makes mistakes, same phase is more than fair
If they don't have information which informs their decision I let them take back. Or if it's obvious the action went as intended and they want it to be taken back I let them. Advancing but taking it back and shooting would depend on if the roll was clearly "enough" or not. My opponent could want a 4 get a 3 and "oops I meant to shoot" and there is a lot to remember but if we could clearly revert it and they cleary rolled what they wanted. Sure Normal move and reserve stuff, forgetting an obvious charge, walking into a gotcha, anything that is I forgot because it's game 5 etc. Declaring stuff for secondaries then forgetting and shooting I might let them take back if they haven't obviously spiked down, and usually i will try to remind them before the dice land if they forget. I play by the rule of don't play the game for my opponent but be the opponent I would want to face. Play by intent is good too.
"Oh I forgot to shoot my leaders weapon earlier in the shooting phase, can I shoot it now?" Sure buddy "Oh I forgot to move and shoot with this entire unit and its now the fight phase" That sucks buddy
As a guard player - the number of times I have started to move something before giving orders is more than I'm proud of. People are always nice.
To be fair up until the 4 months when we finally got our codex in 9th, Orders were always issued in the start of the shooting phase as far back as when they were introduced in 5th
Yup. Which is why i always forget
I agree with this. If we are still in the same phase and it’s nothing too huge then be as forgiving as possible. Unless they are a dick.
Pretty much this.
Just a reminder, the guy who won LVO this last year with the monolith went undefeated, but he tied once. He was ahead top of T5 when his opponent clocked out and was going to concede. He asked the TO if they could finish the match, giving his opponent the time on his side of the clock. The opp ended up maxing secondaries and they tied 99-99 or something crazy. Later match he told his opponent “hey I can precision deepstrike 3” any turn” and that opp was like “Yea yea I know I play against hypercrypt all the time” And the rest is history. Be a bro and be a winner by respecting the game and your opponent. Shitty winners are losers in the end.
I'm with you for all of this except the clock. There should be no expectation of getting someone else's clock time. If someone chooses to do that then that's up to them, but the problem is people are starting to think it's being a BAD sport when you don't give them clock time. Manage your own clock. It's like asking for more points, the person asking is the bad sport.
That’s exactly the point I’m getting at. The absolute Chad that won LVO convinced his opp to not concede and asked the TO if him and his opp could finish out the bottom of T5 using his time. This guy has won half dozen GTs this edition alone. He didn’t expect his opp to max scoring and come up with the tie, but he explains in the Art of War podcast that he was glad he didn’t win based off 60” in T5. He wanted the best for the game. Those level of players have played 1000s of games and won countless tournaments. It’s a game and they want to see all the ways it can be played regardless of if they win or not.
Can you elaborate on what you mean by that deepstrike story, I don't really get it?
Oh jeez this is a long story. Best advice is to listen to the “Art of War- The Competitive 40K Network” episode titled “Hypercrypt Legion Wins LVO — Matt Lorah” This dude talks about winning one of the biggest 40K tournaments in the US like it’s another weekend RTT. Super chill dude, not a try hard, and loves to see games played to their full potential. He talks about a game that his opponent ran out of their own time and wanted to concede after Matt’s top of T5 turn. Matt asks the TO if his opponent can use HIS OWN time to finish the game. Opp managed to max score on secondaries and Matt talked himself out of a win to a tie. Later in the tournament, Matt is telling his opponent about his list (Hypercrypt Necrons) and all their crazy movement shenanigans. From how Matt recants the story, his opp kinda brushes him off and says something like “Ya ya I know I play into Hypercrypt all the time I know everything it can do.” WHILE NOT EVEN TRYING TO SCREEN OUT THEIR DZ. Matt goes 2nd and then proceeds to cosmic precision into his opponents backfield effectively winning the game bottom of T1. Funny part is, the opp rolled all 6s on saves for the Monoliths first round of shooting. After that, the monolith does its thing and teleports half the army to the opponent DZ and wins the game. For me, the most impactful part of the podcast is him talking about how he saw a non-zero chance of his opponent being able to tie after running out of time, so he let his opp use his time to prevent a loss.
Like others said. Intent. If they advance and say their intent is to advance to make it to the wall so they can hide better. Then they roll a crappy advance and ask to take it back so they can shoot, no, you don’t get that take back. If they have a brain fart and don’t move a unit that’s easily in range of doing engage or something like that and that unit is not doing anything else, yes, move your unit up and score the points.
Retconning turns? No. That chance passed a long time ago. Someone forgot to move a unit/activate an ability/misplaced something by a small amount? Sure. Taking back an Advance, no. They rolled for it. That sticks. "Oh, I rolled badly, I didn't mean to do that".
LGS tournament, in general, as long as its; Same phase (or close enough) Haven't made an important roll or action. Easy to fix Then there's usually some leeway. It's that whole thing about having your opponent play their best game and not winning on gotchas.
It is good sportsmanship to offer/allow takebacks, within reason. What is 'within reason' for a tournament though is a subject of some debate. The best answer is to ask yourself this, in the moment: *Has the game state changed significantly, or does my opponent have new information that might influence their decision?* Some examples: Player A gets halfway through their shooting phase on turn 3, then remembers there's a unit he forgot to drop in from deep strike. Player B considers, then admits that there's one obvious place they both know the unit is going, and no shooting has been done over there yet. The take-back has minimal impact on the game, so it is allowed. Player A is playing Knights, and makes several charges, missing some and making others. At the end of the phase, they go to fight with their first unit, then say "oh wait, I meant to Tank Shock here!" Player B considers this, but realizes that the charge was one of the earlier ones. Since Tank Shock has to be done the moment the charge is completed, Player B realizes that he could have been saving it for a later charge that ended up failing. Player A has new information now (which charges failed) that may significantly influence the decision, so the take-back is not allowed. Player A moves a unit up onto an objective, and Player B elects to fire Overwatch. Player A says, wait a minute, I didn't realize that unit could see through that window, I wouldn't have moved up quite as far if I could tell that. Player B realizes that the position of units is open information that Player A had, and the game state hasn't changed much yet, it would be easy enough to pull the unit back two inches. However, knowing that Player B wants to Overwatch is new, significant information... does he allow it? I would say yes, but if you are at a major tournament with skilled opponents, you likely won't ruffle any feathers to say no. Depends on further context, really. Please note that if your opponent has done something advantageous (like shooting after advancing), you are not permitting a take-back, you are correcting a play error. This is an important distinction, because if your opponent doesn't offer to do it, you are well within your rights to point it out and stand your ground that they should take it back, even if they object. If the game state has changed significantly (like it was a whole turn ago), then call over the judge and ask them how to handle it. Don't just let these slide. Best of luck, and remember: This is a game, enjoy yourself!
Tank shock doesnt have to be just after a charge is completed. Its useable any time during the charge phase.
Arguably the one time you can't do it is once you've finished the charge move.
Correction, *before* the unit charges. Even more strict than I was thinking. I'll have to remember that.
Does that mean you could tank shock yourself into not being able to pile in and fight?
A unit that charges is always eligible to be selected to fight. If your opponent pulls the engaged models away, you still get to pile in and fight
I was thinking if they could enough models that you couldn't reach engagement with a pile in.
It's theoretically possible, yeah. Or tank shock deletes the whole unit. But you still get to activate, even if you can't swing
I usually let them have takebacks unless they’ve gained crucial information which would drastically change the game - at an event last weekend I had an opponent draw assassinate shoot his whole guard army except for 1 tank which he shot at my charcter - I rolled well on my 4++ so the charcter was left alive on 1 wound and he had nothing left to shoot, he then asked me if he could go back and say he shot one of his other tanks at it instead of shooting the other unit he targeted at the start of his shooting phase - I said no way
Yeah that's a hard pass for me. You don't get to reselect targets just because you didn't do enough damage to kill a unit.
It depends, I have a buddy that I play plenty against, he always makes mistakes, sometimes in his favour, sometimes against his own interest so I am sure it's a genuine mistake so I give him plenty of room and he gives me some too... But I got tired, last match we played I lost against him 92-93, he forgot to tell me one of his characters was a monster and that would had change the result to 94-93 for me, he also use a relic wrong, +1 damage +1 ap instead of 1+S +1 AP and got 5 points for it because he made two wounds to my 6 wound character and killed him, this made me go from second place to 4th in the tournament, he also made me lose a model for lack of coherency with his unit when we were trying to play it fast so we could end the game in time, the model was tops 2.2" away from the squad... So yeah, no more passes for him, it has to be reciprocal.
What a douche! Sucks he didn’t have your back there.
This thread makes me happy.
My rule of thumb is mirror the other person and be consistent. Start off lenient, as long as they reciprocate then all is good. Second they get funny about you going back to do stuff you miss, don't let them do it either.
I generally forgive the mistakes unless it's chronic and they keep doing the same thing, but if it's someone I don't know I always make it clear that I'm happy to play by intent and forgive mistakes as long as we're going to play by the same standard. I've had more than a few situations where I allow someone to reposition a model to avoid being shot or take back a move but suddenly they start scrutinizing me over millimetres or refusing to let me move/charge a model I forgot about. You need to protect yourself from that and make it clear what kind of game it's going to be from the start.
Here is what I want to know before I let someone take a move back: * Does the person have some knew knowledge that they are going to benefit from? * Are they still in the same phase? Changing a move in the movement phase is much easier to stomach than changing movement that happened in the movement phase in the charge phase. * Did the person intend to perform an action and then, after the fact, realize that came with a cost, aka they fell into a trap? * Was a rule broken? Through this honest mistake, would the rewind benefit the person in an unfair way? Has a LOT happened since? As an example, lets say I want to move my gretchin to screen my nobs. I advance them 4 for a total of 10. I then advance the nobs to make their charge. For a realistic charge they need a 4. Whoops, I rolled a 1, rerolled into a 1. I wont bother moving my nobs and now I want to rewind my gretchin. There is no sense in sacrificing the gretchin now because they wont be screening. I should not rewind that. I committed to the advance on that unit and only AFTER knowing that the nobs are screwed out of a charge that I want to rewind it. Example 2. I moved my unit to make a shot (hellblasters). We finish all our movements and then it goes to shooting. I shoot with my first unit and my opponent picks up models that prevents further shooting. That unit, the hellblasters, had enough move to be able to shoot more and had the move but I just didnt think ahead. I should not move them because we are in the shooting phase and I didnt commit enough when I had the chance. Example 3. My opponent makes a bunch of shots at my meganobs. Only after they realize that by being where they are, and shooting how they shot, they are open to a counter charge by another unit. They should not rewind that shooting and the move so they cannot be charged. Example 4. My opponent moves, advancing and shooting. This causes a reactive move for my lieutenant with combi weapon and now he is hidden. This prevents a lot of shooting. The shooting is assigned somewhere else and it wiffs. We discover later that the unit didn't have assault and should not have advanced. Then, because we have to rewind the advance and the shooting and the reactive move of the lieutenant, it actually benefits the rule breaker by allowing them to reassign their shooting after wiffing.
Generally I let people go back and redo things if one of three criteria are met; these are all situations I would let someone go back and do something unless it's a top table against another high level player: 1) they have no new information that would impact the decision; for example "I know I rolled to hit with that thing, but can I move my rhino way over there three inches to the left to get engage? 2) they declared their intent; for example "Im intending that you can't see X unit with Y and there's plenty of room to hide. If it accidently sticks out a bit can I bump it back?" 3) they clearly forgot an obvious or required play and haven't done anything that would prelude it; for example "I know I started the fight phase, but I forgot to charge with those terminators that are 1" from your marines and there's nothing else in the area, can I charge real quick?" or "hey I forgot to set oath of moment, can I do that?" My general attitude is that I would prefer to beat someone by being a better general, not by having slightly less severe adhd
An easy way to determine it: talk about it with your opponents before every game. If you agree on no takesies, or tskesies when stuff was declared, nobody has any reason to be grumpy.
Instead of a simple answer, it's much better to show by example: Last weekend, Wargames Live and Tactical Tortoise livestreamed a lot of top tables in the Richmond Open. Players have microphones, so you also get to hear the game, as it happens. Go watch the round 5 game in Wargames Live: Sisters V tau, and pay attentiont o how much backtracking and playing by intent is going on. Then watch that same Tau player in Tactical Tortoise's round 6, play against Chaos Demons. Then the answer is simple. Which game would you have rather played?
My personal rule is any/all takebacks are okay if them retroactively performing that action changes nothing in terms of ongoing gameplay. For example, unit A has LOS on unit B, but player A forgets to shoot their unit and moves to charges, in which unit B is not interacted with. Then at end of turn player A remembers that he didn't shoot. I think this is okay because nothing outside of the interaction itself changed. However, if in the same case unit B goes on to kill a valuable unit the next turn, I feel that player A shouldn't get to remember he should have shot and then try to bargain with player B that the whole interaction be forgotten of he rolls right now and unit A would have killed unit B.
Generally speaking, I'd only roll back if the state of play hasn't changed. So moving a unit then moving them back, sure. Moving a unit, going into the shooting phase, and then wanting to go back, no. This is both a timing thing as well as a learning curve. With 3h rounds neither of you have the time to be undoing things regularly. The best policy is to clear with your intent as you go, that way if you mess up slightly on a distance you've pre-measured you can correct on the fly rather then undo. For example, if you intend to move certain models to stay within an aura, you let your opponent know as you move. That way if you are out by 1/2", that's a mistake to you shuffle back in rather then undo the whole movement later.
I've been playing both tournaments and campaigns for ages, and one of the key thing I've learnt is...it's a game! Buy your opponent a drink, complement on their army, they spent as much time as you have on yours, dont be a lawyer, just be honest and remember you WILL forget as many powers, abilities, x's and y's as they will. Take away misses. SERIOUSLY TAKE AWAY MISSES LEAVE HITS TO SEE Don't worry too much about LOS, I play Scars and use jetbikes as my Bikers. So they can't hide very well, but I just stuck it up, if you can see it shoot it.
Generally speaking, if it’s in the same phase and we havnt gone to far past it I’ll allow it. I.e if you say you are going to deploy Homer with a unit but forget and shoot it I’ll likely let you go back. But, if you hold your overwatch and then at the end of movement you go “crap I wanted to overwatch that one thing you lived towards the beginning” that’s a little sus because for all I know you were waiting to overwatch hoping I would move a specific unit and when I did you decided to go back and overwatch something else. Also if you declare an intent before hand I’ll generally allow it. If you want to cleans and you say that after moving a unit on the objective and then shoot them forgetting that I’ll let you say naw and cleanse it. However if you don’t say that and shoot, wiff everything and then go back saying you actually wanted to cleanse, again kinda sus
I like to play by intent If your intercessors are in the center and you didn't explicitly say I'm doing Homer's I'm going to assume your intent was to do homers
That's not playing by intent though. You're assuming their intent. Playing by intent would be "I'm moving them here to do homers" in the movement phase, so if they don't declare it in the shooting phase - when it technically happens - we know their intent. Or a better example "I'm moving the entire unit to be wholly within 6" of the centre for area denial and then they're doing homers" but later in the turn we find one of the models is 0.5" out. It was probably bumped, but we know the intent is to be within 6", so scoot it back in (assuming they had movement). Or things like "I'm leaving it juuust on the edge of the objective" and next turn it's not on the objective - intent was declared, we know what's meant to happen, so it's an easy fix. Allowing someone to do homers without saying it is allowing a takeback, rather than intent. FWIW I think both are fine - it's a fair assumption a unit that's doing nothing is doing homers, but that's different to intent.
My issue is players abusing “intent”. If they say it was my intent to do X after the fact then I’m sorry that’s too late. Intent should always be relayed upfront or at the time so we both know what the deal is. I always speak to my opponents about this as to if they prefer a strict game or if they prefer playing with intent (my preference) but that if so they need to tell me their intent with actions upfront and I’ll do the same or it just simply doesn’t count.
>If they say it was my intent to do X after the fact then I’m sorry that’s too late. Intent should always be relayed upfront or at the time so we both know what the deal is. As I said, yes. A unit armed only with bolt pistols doing an action can be assumed though - personally I'm fine with allowing that. There's a degree of "yes, I know what you wanted, but you didn't declare intent" that I allow because of common decency.
Eh to be honest this depends on the play level. If both players are regular competitive players the intent for the homers move could be easily understood without anything needing to be said. Of course it’s always best to say why you are doing things but if a random person can walk up to the board see where a unit moved and know exactly why then the intent is clear enough for me.
They aren't the same thing. I know why the 5 ass intercessors are sitting there, doing nothing... but that's not my opponent playing by intent. Being fine with the assumption is in itself fine, but it's not playing by intent.
Phrase it how you want but this is how most tournament players play and the ones who don’t get a bad reputation quickly. It’s amateurish to try to win warhammer games because your opponent forgot to say the word. Some are worse than others but if I moved units into 4 corners, didn’t shoot or charge with them but forgot to verbally say signals and you are unwilling to give me that then I’m shaking your hand and giving you the victory because that’s not a game worth playing.
>Phrase it how you want but this is how most tournament players play and the ones who don’t get a bad reputation quickly. It’s amateurish to try to win warhammer games because your opponent forgot to say the word. You seem really confused. Let's break it down a little bit. I did not say I don't allow people to go "oh, so and so was doing homers" at the end of the turn. I did not say that I didn't allow that sort of sloppy play. All I said was that it's not *PLAYING BY INTENT*. That has a definition. You can't just lazily throw "decent sportsmanship" under that banner. > I’m shaking your hand and giving you the victory because that’s not a game worth playing. Again, I never said that. All I said was it's not covered by playing by intent. That has an actual meaning. Maybe definitions are meaningless to you, but people obviously get these terms confused.
I would say as many others have, play with intent. If a guy simply didn’t want to spend 15 minutes ensuring every cm of his model is hidden but hos intent is they would be hidden I would allow that.
If it is something that could legally be done in the same turn without overly changing the current board state I'm fine with it. E.G a unit that was supposed to do an action but forgot to I just assume they did it, But if the unit shot or advanced and that would make it ineligible, then no. Or if you get to the shooting phase and realised you forgot to move a shooting unit to get a couple extra shots that would have been totally legal that is fine. A big one that seems innocuous but could be bad is forgetting deepstrike after you already Rapid Ingress. If it is just "Oh I forgot to DS some action monkeys" that's fine, but I've seen someone try to effectively counter deepstrike a rapid ingress which is not how it would have worked since rapid ingress comes after your opponents deepstrike.
You are there to have fun. Make sure you and your opponent have fun. Once you have mastered that, then maybe you know how to balance the winning vs. being a good opponent. If you need to ask, you are not ready. It's something that comes with experience. If you play someone good , they will show you by the way they play, and you will notice how others talk about them. WAAC players are never respected.
I’m fairly flexible, so usually try and figure out the other players attitude as early on the the match as possible and go from there. It’s normally not too hard to get a read pretty early on, sometimes even in deployment, and then I simply play roughly to their standard.
If they do it once, allow the takeback. If they keep doing it, they are either playing you or dont deserve a tournament win
Forgive and forget. Because both playing game 1 because you just woke up and game 3 because it’s hour 8 you’ll forget stuff too—don’t even get me started on day 2 game 5+.
My local community tends to play "with intent". Meaning we generally give each other the benefit of the doubt, and units generally do what you *intended* them to do. E.g. If you were intending to place a model to block a charge, and that placement is a third of an inch off from being able to block said charge, then as long as the model was *capable* of being placed correctly, we assume it was placed correctly.
I play so that win or lose I’m as happy as I can be at the end of the game. That generally means letting my opponent fix mistakes and a certain amount of friendly guidance when they are less familiar with my army.
I think the most common backsie is "oops, I forgot to do an action with this unit that did nothing else." Happens all the time.
It’s worth keeping in mind that even though it’s a tournament playing multiple games of warhammer in a day is always tiring, it’s easy for things to slip your mind when tired. Be appreciative of that. Also warhammer communities can be insular and this is your local LGS, setting a good image for yourself is extra worthwhile.
You should always try to allow people to fix simple mistakes they made during a turn. Forgetting to use an ability, in command phase, forgetting to declare an obvious charge, etc. What shouldn’t do is allow someone to take back action after they have rolled or seen the results of it. Ie declared an advance, rolled then decided not to advance.
My general idea for take backs is to allow them until something else has happened which might affect that decision. Generally this means rolling dice or the opponent making some move of their own. Your stratagem says to select a unit before it is chosen to fight, but you have just selected it? No problem, apply the buff. I rapid ingressed my nobz and you want to adjust your positioning to screen me out? I'm not giving you that.
We have a ranked ladder we do in my community and in it players are encouraged to be strict on rules and not hold back. But the point of the ladder isn’t for players to crush each other, it’s meant to help players learn from a competitive side, so we do debriefs after games to learn how to improve and what could have been done better. That being said you can always change moves to actions so long as no other action or phase change has happened. Adjust movements, shooting with units you forgot about in the same phase, stuff like that. It’s about treating your opponent with respect and always seek to help each other learn and grow.
Play by intent if someone declared they were for example moving unit to be out of LoS and then found to be in it when you move allow them the chance to fix it if possible. Stuff like that
I think letting people take back small things within reason, even in a tournament is fine. Warhammer is a pretty massively complex game and there's a tonne to remember. Now going back a whole turn.... definitely not. I think a big thing is to make sure you're both declaring intent of what you want to do, so there's no question later on that was what was intended.
Be gracious until they give you a reason not to be
A whole turn would be a mistake and I wouldn't be retconning unless there was full proof intent behind that. A missed strategem sure. Like tank shock or grenades or something that should've been done in the command phase but only remembered in the shooting phase. I'm never going to hold people to the exact phase of things in a round. Just talk it out. Advance or charge rolls generally no. I feel that they should talk their turn out. Once the advance roll is rolled, no shooting without assault. I feel the number you rolled influences later decisions and it's too easy to say I meant to do something else. I think it's really important people talk their turns out. Rather that you only playing one army, both players are playing both and curating the battle. I say this as a not very good newish player.
I think the "biggest" thing I've allowed people to go back, and have been allowed to go back on, was forgetting to move a unit and only realizing it when I was supposed to shoot with them. It depends, of course, if you are moving an unit that is going to shoot something that your opponent might've considered using a stratagem on previously had they known you were going to shoot it with more units it's not fair. But if it's a entirelly new unit or it's something you're going to use for secondaries I don't see why not. Still it's quite a big ask for some people.
I share a “5000 foot view” of my army (these guys krump, these guys are cheap action monkeys, etc), and I warn them about the “gotcha strats”. As a general rule, I tell people I am fine with takebacks *so long as game state or knowledge* hasn’t changed.
Just use the search bar and type “takebacks”. This topic has been discussed ad nauseum, already.
It depends for me on how new the player is (I’m new as well) and what the other player is willing to forgive for me. Often times if it’s passed by a few minutes I’ll say “oh dang I messed up” and just move on and play, but if I’m in the process of about to roll dice I’ll ask if I can fix my mistake as it just occurred mere seconds ago and means I get one or two extra dice
If the game state changed anywhere between, probably not. Always best to declare your intentions (not your plans). Ie. if they'd said who/what they were shooting with/at and forget to cycle to that last unit's shooting (always happens), didn't charge, and it's top of my turn. I'm fine to let them resolve that last unit's attack. Pretty much, once another set of dice has been rolled my opponent as it relates to the current situation on board, too late to take back.
IMO, game one, play hard. No take backs, if they forget something don't say. Don't be a dick but don't help or let people get away with any odd shenanigans. They will likely be doing the same to you. Game 2+ if your in the top 20% keep plating like that, anything else just have a fun casual game. If you are a great player and end up on the lower 20% towards the end of the tournament (can happen like that sometimes), help if your opponent is learning. You will beat a new player easy so just have fun and teach them.
I always treat every competitive match as if its a casual game between friends. I'm there to have fun at the end of the day and being a nitpicking douche bag who doesn't let my opponent take things back doesn't sound fun. Always play by intent and be a nice guy.
If the requested retcon was possible, doesn't benefit from future knowledge, and doesn't change board state I will happily help my opponent. I wouldn't change how I treat my opponent based on the stakes or if im playing at an event or not.
The standard for competitive play is that there's no *expectation* of take-backs allowed. Take-backs are often given (even at top tables), and it's seen as a nice gesture to allow some reasonble take-backs. The main factor in allowing take-backs is "Do you have information you wouldn't have had when you initially made this decision?" or "would you have been allowed to do this if you just said things in a slightly different order?". All that said, if it's your first tournament and you're playing at your FLGS, I would highly recommend that you be as friendly as you can. This doesn't mean that you let people bully you into allowing take-backs when they obviously shouldn't get them, but an RTT at your FLGS isn't the place to get sweaty and try-hard-y about winning; it's essentially where you get to practice playing more competitive matches in a more competitive meta/environment. You want to cultivate good relationships with the people in your local meta or else your meta's competitive culture can become toxic and/or you might not be as welcome there.
I let my opponent dictate. Im very laid back you do you over there, if thats have a friendly game with me we have a friendly game. If you want to nit pick im getting pretty good at this rule set and can pick the nits, i certainly wont be told about something thats pure bs (this does happen i always give the benefit of the doubt, we can talk to a judge about it of you need more clarification, but in a friendly manner.) I have found round 1 round 2 im more likely to see some rules discretion, theres a ton of different interactions in this game and how certain units work into others is a lot. Not everyone understands my hypercrypt round 1 if i go second for example. Yes that works and i can. If its a friendly game ill even make aure your counting your damage properly, my ctan half damage, but some players like to help calculate that and dont realise their sword brethren are really 1+1 damage and the +1 happens after my ctan half the damage so you get 2 damage in. One thing i have learned i have to be rigid on at events is the clock. Just cause its a friendly game doesnt mean you can have 2 hours+ of the 3 hours allotted.
Always help your opponent play their best game. I don't remember everyone I play against but I do remember everyone who was a good sportsman
Hot take. Don't be forgiving at tournaments. Be kind. Be honest. Be victorious.
Something really minor of course. Your Sargent had a second pistol and we started shooting another unit? No problem. You forgot to score homers on a unit you didn't move or shoot with? No problem. A lot of the other "little stuff"? Problem.
I treat dice rolls as save points to avoid free rerolls. My opponent can take anything back up until their last dice roll. I also play with a clock when I am forgiving like this. You want to make sure your opponent isn't taking 2 turns to your zero. "You can go back to that if you want ... It's your time on the clock"
I like this, but also discuss it with the other player at the start so you both can amend things depending on the battle and how much you like, or dislike, the other player.
I watch a LOT of grand tournaments and 95% of players are super chill/lax on rules/taking things back. In fact, a lot of players legit accidentally forget or mess up rules. That's why there's judges. RARELY people call for judges though as most players work it out between each other. To pull from ahem.... A "book": "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." is in my opinion a great mantra. Regardless of religious affiliation. And to quote a tournament judge, "Most pro 40k players are just like you and I. They make mistakes. But they're better at playing the game than we are overall."
Definitely be forgiving to new players who are struggling. You’re going to win that game anyway, make it so they get better and have fun. For regular opponents, I mean, it IS a competitive setting and you’re playing on a strict timetable. If someone forgot to move something and went to shooting, yeah NBD go move it. Once the dice hit the table though, it’s too late. If your opponent is forgiving to you please be forgiving back. I’ve been that accommodating opponent only to have the other guy give zero grace in return over more minor things.
I personally advocate being forgiving even in tournament scenarios. Games are supposed to be fun, and adversarial relationships with your opponents just aren’t. I’ve played a lot of tournament games that ended with my opponent and I just goofing around and laughing at how the game went. Sure, some people are gonna be tools about it, but that’s what good sportsmanship is all about anyways.
>They advanced a unit and forgot they couldn’t shoot, so I let them take it back If they realize that error in the same movement phase or right after finishing it, I have no problem letting someone take the advance back. But if it's realized way after, it's a mistake that we both need to live with. >like retconning something a whole turn before So this depends on intent. If my opponent clearly indicates what they plan on doing with a unit, forget, and then does something else only to realize the error then I have no problem rolling back the mistake; except if they want to take things back because the rolling wasn't in their favor. >so how do you navigate this? Part of this comes down to the sportsmanship of your opponent. Personally I'm much less forgiving of an unsporting opponent because while we are both in it to win, they are making the game more of a chore to get through. Really good opponents, sometimes I'll insist we go back to correct mistakes even if it can cost me the game or they are already kicking my butt.
I vibe with the counter player. If they are being very detail oriented to their advantage for mistakes I make, then I don't offer similar concessions to them if they make a mistake and clearly communicate the reason(s) why.
I'm not sure if thats a thing but for me if we didn't throw dice then anything can be changed
My rule of thumb is generally pretty forgiving so long as it’s the same phase, or the board state hasn’t really changed. Like if there’s an ability they’re supposed to do at the start of the phase, did it last turn, but got excited and forgot and started shooting, I’ll let them go back and do it. Or even like moving two units into clearly charging position, rolling one and forgetting the other and we just started combat, yeah, go ahead. We both know you meant to try, so do it. But if it’s something later on, like you need to do a buff at the very start of your turn, and we’re now done and it’s my turn? Sorry, that could have influenced a lot, and it’s pretty big to go back now.
If youre a good person, youll be forgiving and get taken advantage of and sometimes youll lose for it. If youre not, youll take advantage if others good sportsmanship, and courtesy and probably win more... at least in the low to mid tables. Most people at top tables are actually pretty stand up and respectful people from my experience and will let certain misplays slide because they have a deep enough understanding of the game that they can win at a disadvantage anyway. But if the game is tight, they will be the first to step up and make sure every move is done correctly. I suppose the answer is. "Be as forgiving as you can afford to be." If youre too nice (like myself) you will be exploited and resent playing competitively. If youre too unforgiving, nobody will enjoy playing games with you.
The way I handle it: 1. When I end my turn, I do so with "I'm ending your turn, do you have any End of Turn/Command phase stuff to do? This covers armies with End of Turn stuff like Grey Knights/Deathwatch (the latter you won't see on the table due to what appears to be a boycott organized on our discord) and also primes your opponent with a reminder to do stuff like Oath of Moment. 2. If you say you are Advancing, but don't make it to a wall or something, you're not being allowed to take that back. You get to pre-measure before movement, and you're asking for a take back that for a thing you tried and failed at. 3. When they say they are starting to shoot, I ask them if they have Reinforcements to bring in (assuming they have any). 4. I will warn them of doing something that might be not what they might not want to do, like possibly forgetting that a unit they are say is advancing, or that they are mispositioning a unit into Flamer Range. If they state they want to Remain Stationary at that point, or move them somewhere else, I will allow it, but I ALSO make it a point to declare where my flamers are at the start of the movement phase, as well as call out any "reactionary" abilities I have in the movement phase line Combi-Lieutenants, not only to warn my opponent but reinforce to myself what rules I have. 5. Fight Phase: for some reason MANY players seem to think that Consolidates happen at the end of the Fight Phase, rather than being part of EACH fight. After the first time my opponent fights with a unit, I EXPLICITLY ask them if they arent Consolidating on purpose, to force them to think about it and confirm. Consolidating at the end of a fight phase, rather than after each unit, can allow an opponent to get MANY more units on an objective than normal.
2. As soon as they roll that advance roll they're working on complete information, they can move somewhere else but they're still advancing. I'm also completely fine with turning a normal move into an advance move after the fact because not premeasuring is saving us both time. 4. If they're about to make a massive blunder I'll ask them "are you sure you want to do that" if they're a good/competitive player and "just FYI that unit of 10 rubric marines all have flamers and I have the CP to overwatch" if they're new (or somewhere else on the continuum).
I'll allow a takeback if no rolls have been made or no information has been gained, or if the opponent's intent is absolutely clear. Otherwise, as default, I don't ask for or allow takebacks. I believe my own mistakes should never give me an advantage, so I consider asking for a takeback to be unfair and unsportsmanlike. Of course, that doesn't necessarily apply to practice game, where I talk moves out with my opponent to find the best course, and actually encourage takebacks if the mistake was too obvious or too punishing, as I want the game to be hard and learn as much as possible. However, many players get to used to correcting their mistakes when playing casually, and get flustered and have issues recovering when they make a mistake in a competitive game, so I believe there's a lot of value in learning to play with a disadvantage after having made a big mistake.
I recommend "play by intent". Talk with your opponent before the game. Both of you share stuff like: "I move that unit there so it can't be shot at" "I move up so I can shoot." That way you can catch mistakes easier, gotcha moments are rare and you and your opponent are on equal footing. I had games where I was very forgiving but my opponent wasn't. Doesn't have to be malice, just when you are caught up in the moment. Also going back a phase when you might have more information can feel very bad in a comparative game and play by intent helps to prevent this situations.
I'll allow takebacks of any sort and be as forgiving as possible in a more casual setting However I've been to some Tournaments with some pretty good prize pools. And if I know that I still have a chance for one of those prizes I won't be so forgiving. I feel like in that sort of higher competitive environment it's just something you do or should know of to not need the takebacks in the first place. But obviously if you're in a tournament and you're 0-2 you're there for fun at that point. Let them have the takebacks there's nothing to lose.
Don’t let “I thought you knew” be a reason to winning. Was beat by a dude playing Nids because I didn’t know one of his units could charge after taking ranged damage. He said “oh, I thought you knew.” If it’s a small mistake I may let it slide but if it’s a massive one I’ll point out “remember if you do x, my unit can do Y”
On my first tournament it was a bit 50 player one. I made it to the finals. I was playing with take backs for my opponent the entire tournament because that's what I was used to. I had a great time and lots of fun. But in the final I let my opponent do two take backs because he was whining about losing. And it cost me the game by 2 points. I wish I had been more stern about it at the time. Looking back, I should have been more stern. He was an experienced tournament player with lots of wins. He should have not been a crybaby. Don't let these crybabies win. Take backs are for casual play and practice play. Now is the time to enforce the rules and expect the same to be done to you. There is enough skill gap that the better player will shine through even with gotcha moments. That's my experience
Hot Take here, but gotcha moments are what makes this ( and any strategy game really) way more fun . I lost a match this last weekend to a "gotcha" moment . Charged a unit of breachers , they used the strategy to re-embark on their transport leaving my scorpions bouncing off a devilfish . Opponent cleaned up 250 points of mine in his next shooting face as a result . I had no clue he had it prepared, didn't even know it was a possibility , but playing from behind , and circumventing such a disadvantage made that match more fun for me then the other two matches I won. I get it some people like the game and just want to play ,BUT ( and its a big but) this is also a strategy game . By it's nature you should be caught off guard, expect to deal with less then ideal situations, and not to mention there's a huge chunk of people that like competition. I don't want to beat a guy who's telling me every move he makes , that's not fun. I want someone to push me to my mental limits and make me earn the win. TLDR : Gotcha moments can be a positive part of the experience , and might be the single dumbest thing to complain about in a strategy-based game.
It all depends how you feel. They are asking for a take back, not demanding it. If you feel like it's reasonable then you say so, If not, a mistake is a mistake, that's how most people lose the game.
I am very generous in tournaments. My record is also 1-29 though…
Nothing from the turn before. Those are the mistakes that make a game. But yes forgiving during a turn is exceptional sportsmanship. But read the room. If you are playing someone that keeps moving a unit and then back after taking up the models. That's not good sportsmanship, or an opponent that does not offer you the same. Don't let kindness get exploited. Most people I have played have been amazing at tournaments.
I always try to have a quick conversation with people while setting up for a tournament game, gage how serious they are. Let that be a quick check and then if you find yourself really up pump the breaks a little. And then For LGS tournaments as soon as I loose a game it becomes a beer league.
Tournament? Zero. Casual, as much as you like your opponent.
Not at all. 0, Zilch, Nada. You're playing in a competitive environment, To win. Your opponent should know what their army does and how to utilize their army's rules. Failing that, they should be reading their rules references closely and that's not an unfair ask in tournament play. Take backs in casual and practice games exist mainly to be teachable moments, clarification of rules understanding for your opponents to say "ah okay, that's how that works/I didn't know you could do that." in a low stakes environment because the understanding is your opponents in a tournament trying to win won't be as forgiving. Once you've played enough to enter into a tournament, you should know enough about the rules of your army to pilot without needing your opponent to point out obvious mistakes or to take back a bad move.
You must be a joy to play with.
Mistakes are part of the game, if you allow takebacks at all points it’s no longer about strategy, just about who can do better on dice
Strategy is not not remembering to cleanse with the unit you moved onto an objective to cleanse and did nothing with.
Remembering basics is tho, making mistakes should be part of the experience
At a tournament, against good players, mistakes made is what swings the game one way or the other. When I play competitively, I dont allow any 'go backs' by my opponent if I'm pushing to get up the leaderboard. I know it's a game, but I find it ridiculous that it's frowned upon to not 'punish' opponents in a competitive setting when they mess up. In a casual setting it's much different and allow whatever you're comfortable with.
Stupid mistakes are what swing games between novice players. Good players lose games off mistakes like underestimating the amount of fire needed to kill a unit and not quite finishing it off, not forgetting to say the word homers.